You are here

Islam

  • Summary: 

    Indonesia, the world’s biggest Muslim-majority country, has a constitution that recognizes other major religions, and practices a syncretic form of Islam that draws on not just the faith’s tenets but local spiritual and cultural traditions. As a result, the nation has long been a voice of, and for, moderation in the Islamic world.

    Yet Indonesia is not without its . Though most are on the fringe, they can add up to a significant number given Indonesia’s 260-million population. In the early 2000s, the country was  by  (JI), a homegrown extremist organization allied with al-Qaeda. JI’s deadliest attack was the  that killed 202 people. While JI has been neutralized, ISIS has claimed responsibility for recent, smaller terrorist incidents in the country and has  — Indonesians who could pose a threat when they return home. The country has also seen the rise of hate groups that preach intolerance and violence against local religious and ethnic minorities, which include Shia and Ahmadiya Muslims.

    See also: 

    ....

    Many Western politicians and intellectuals say that Islamist terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. What is your view?

    Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.

    Radical Islamic movements are nothing new. They’ve appeared again and again throughout our own history in Indonesia. The West must stop ascribing any and all discussion of these issues to “Islamophobia.” Or do people want to accuse me — an Islamic scholar — of being an Islamophobe too?

    What basic assumptions within traditional Islam are problematic?

    The relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, the relationship of Muslims with the state, and Muslims’ relationship to the prevailing legal system wherever they live … Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity.

    Perhaps there were reasons for this during the Middle Ages, when the tenets of Islamic orthodoxy were established, but in today’s world such a doctrine is unreasonable. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century.

    A Western politician would likely be accused of racism for saying what you just said.

    I’m not saying that Islam is the only factor causing Muslim minorities in the West to lead a segregated existence, often isolated from society as a whole. There may be other factors on the part of the host nations, such as racism, which exists everywhere in the world. But traditional Islam — which fosters an attitude of segregation and enmity toward non-Muslims — is an important factor.

    And Muslims and the state?

    Within the Islamic tradition, the state is a single, universal entity that unites all Muslims under the rule of one man who leads them in opposition to, and conflict with, the non-Muslim world.

  • Negative views of minorities[Muslims], refugees common in EU

  • Summary: 

    In summary, I suggest that your general treatment of the anti-jihad movement as somehow linked to the far right, is fundamentally flawed, partial, and inaccurate, and therefore misrepresents the individuals and groups involved, contrary to the Broadcasting Code. I advise you to make sure that your final programme, should you decide to broadcast it, gives a more balanced and accurate view. I also consider that your reporting methods especially the undercover reporting on public demonstrations and in pubs, are fundamentally unethical and I urge you to delete all such footage, and to apologise to the individuals and organisations concerned. I also urge you to consider whether you have acted against the interests of democracy in targeting public demonstrations for secretive filming, and in slurring the leader of a fledgling political party.

  • Country: 
    Slovakia
    News Date: 
    01/12/2016
    Summary: 

    'We must do everything we can so that no mosque is built in the future'

  • The Challenge of Dawa: Political Islam as Ideology and Movement and How to Counter It

    Image: 

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

    I argue that the American public urgently needs to be educated about both the ideology of political Islam and the organizational infrastructure called dawa that Islamists use to inspire, indoctrinate, recruit, finance, and mobilize those Muslims whom they win over to their cause.

    There is no point in denying that this ideology has its foundation in Islamic doctrine.3 However, “Islam,” “Islamism,” and “Muslims” are distinct concepts. Not all Muslims are Islamists, let alone violent, though all Islamists—including those who use violence—are Muslims. I believe the religion of Islam itself is indeed capable of reformation, if only to distinguish it more clearly from the political ideology of Islamism. But that task of reform can only be carried out by Muslims. Happily, there is a growing number of reformist Muslims. Part of the Trump administration’s strategy must be to support and empower them.

    The other part of the strategy requires confronting dawa, a term unfamiliar to Americans. Dawa as practiced by radical Islamists employs a wide range of mechanisms to advance their goal of imposing Islamic law (sharia) on society. This includes proselytizing but extends beyond that.4 In Western countries, dawa aims both to convert non-Muslims to political Islam and to instill Islamist views in existing Muslims.5The ultimate goal of dawa is to destroy the political institutions of a free society and replace them with the rule of sharia law.

    Admin: Islam may be reformable although evidence for that happening is rather thin on the ground. What is certain is that the West must not be piggy-in-the-middle whilst various factions of Islam fight about reform.

     

  • Summary: 

    There is nothing irrational about fears associated with aspects of Islam.

    Among the most purely dishonest expressions in modern politics (eclipsing even ‘Social justice’) is ‘Islamophobia’. A phobia – the word comes from an ancient Greek term meaning more-or-less ‘panic’ – is a haunting, disabling, panic-inducing, and above all irrational, terror of something generally considered harmless. Cats, clowns, enclosed spaces and the number 13 are among a myriad of such objects. ‘Islamophobia’ is not a phobia at all, though survivors of Islamic terror may feel a fear of Muslims that is perfectly understandable, as survivors of Auschwitz fear SS uniforms. It is not a phobia to criticise Islam’s oppression of women, the literally countless terrorist activities all over the world, or the huge, ongoing massacres of Christians in the third world. Recently a girls’ school in an Islamic country caught fire. The religious police pushed the fleeing girls back into the flames because they were improperly dressed. Is it irrational, or ‘phobic’ to criticise a religion, or a sect, that allows or encourages such things?

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    11/10/2017
    Summary: 
    • Two imams were prepared to officiate wedding of underage girl
    • More than 1,000 of the 8,000 forced marriages of Britons each year are believed to involve girls of 15 or under

    •  
  • Summary: 

    Theresa May thinks that Islam is compatible with Human Rights – stated in her speech following the terrorist attack at London Bridge and Borough Market.  Read the .

    She criticises those who know they are incompatible, rejecting the clear evidence.  An important purpose of UKIP, beyond Brexit, is to force politicians to stop deceiving us regarding Islam.  Thus we must put in the effort to read the source material and collate the evidence.  Everyone in UKIP should read at least chapter 9 of the Koran, understand the terms “” and “”, and watch the videos and read the writings of scholars such as , and .

    Source documents are the , the  (UDHR), and the  (ECHR).  The Declaration and the Convention have a similar core set of Articles, however the ECHR addresses an apparent anomaly in the UDHR.  The ECHR has numerous Articles relating to the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights, which are irrelevant for us when we have our own Bill of Rights.

    The thirty clauses of the UDHR do embody what we should aspire to, for the whole world.  Below are examples where the Koran is incompatible with it.  This is not a complete list, however it does show the severity of the problem and that Theresa May is utterly mistaken.

    UDHR Article 1 states that we should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.  Islam, when it can, subjugates non-believers as second class citizens, who exist in a state of Dhimmitude and pay the Jizya tax as a sign of inferiority.   .

    Article 2 states that everyone is entitled to these rights irrespective of who they are.  Under Islam women are regarded as the property of men, either her father or husband.  The husband determines what she does, and how many children she has.  .

    Article 3.  “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”  Not in Islam.  .

    Article 4 opposes slavery.   allows a Muslim man to keep female captives as sex slaves.  ISIS does so.  Grooming gangs own girls by hooking them on drink and drugs.

    Article 5 disallows cruel and inhuman punishment.   mandates cutting off hands and feet on opposite sides.

    Article 6:  “Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.”  Under Sharia Law the testimony of women is half that of a man, with grave miscarriages of justice – a rapist can accuse his victim of seducing him, and he is let off while she may be stoned to death for adultery.

    Article 7 states that all are equal before the law.  Sharia Law: the inheritance of a woman is half that of a man.    Sharia Councils in the UK have de facto jurisdiction regarding family matters and inheritance, in contravention of Human Rights. They must be abolished.

    Article 16: marriage cannot be coercive.  In Muslim community there can be huge pressure to marry.  Marriage between first cousins is explicitly allowed, , producing thirteen times the cases of recessive genetic disorders compared to the non-Muslim population.  Islam seriously harms Muslims themselves.  UKIP must campaign against this –  must be outlawed.

    Article 18 states that there must be freedom of religion, and freedom to change religion.  Islam is incompatible, there is the death penalty for apostasy, , etc..  A Saudi citizen has been sentenced to death for .

    Article 19 states that we must have freedom of opinion, and freedom to express it.  Islam abjures freedom, witness the fatwa against .  Attacks on cartoonists have de facto created the death penalty for blasphemy.  The UK has prevented the scholar Robert Spencer from , breaching this Article.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    06/03/2015
    Summary: 

    Yet here, Anahita has had to face other challenges. Being lesbian has not been an issue with her contemporaries in London. However, she tells me that being a Shia Muslim here has sometimes proved harder. With many Islamic Societies at British universities mostly under Sunni leadership, the sectarian divides so bitterly apparent in much of the Middle East between the Sunni majority and the Shia minority are making themselves felt here in the UK.

  • Summary: 

    "Not long ago Professor Koopmans found that as much as seventy percent of Muslims find Islamic rules more important than secular laws." -- Geert Wilders Research also points out that 11 percent of Dutch Muslims in the Netherlands are prepared to use violence on behalf of their religion. That is a 110,000 people, twice the size of the Dutch army!" – Geert Wilders I personally believe there are extremist people and moderate people. But I do not believe in two kinds of Islam. There is only one.... You get your head chopped off should you wish to interpret Islam....People who want to come to the Netherlands from Islamic countries should think: this is not a place we want to go to! And we do not do this to bully Muslims, but to keep the Netherlands of the future a free Netherlands." -– Geert Widers

  • Summary: 

    This smearing nonsense has to stop.  I don’t like Islam and I have every right to feel that way.  As a woman who believes in free speech, it is entirely justified.  In order to preserve the rights and safety of women, and our right to speak our minds, I believe we must end immigration from Muslim countries.  Its not a conclusion I want to reach, but common sense tells me it’s unfortunately necessary.

    I want to halt immigration from theocratic or tyrannical societies because I believe in freedom.  Freedom and totalitarianism, especially religious totalitarianism which gives itself the authority of the creator of the universe, cannot live side by side.  You must pick one.  I pick freedom, and I will fight to preserve it from all that threatens it.

    This isn’t fascism.  This is commitment to liberty and democracy.  I will hold fast to this commitment and I will not cower down.  I will fight for our age-old liberties, and if I become leader, UKIP will be a party that fights for our age-old liberties.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    23/08/2017
    Summary: 

    How well do we understand Islam and the threat that it poses? Does the next leader have a good understanding of it, and relevant policy proposals?

    A questionnaire was sent to all candidates. Anne Marie Waters (AMW), Ben Walker (BW), David Kurten (DK), and John Rees-Evans (JRE) answered the questions. David Allen and David Coburn replied, declining to answer. The remainder failed to reply to repeated requests.

  • Country: 
    Angola
    News Date: 
    25/11/2013
    Summary: 
    • Minister of culture described Islam as a 'sect' which is banned as counter to Angolan customs and culture
    • Nation's president said: ‘This is the final end of Islamic influence in our country'
  • Summary: 
    • For Muslims in other parts of the world, inflammatory outrage -- often based on spurious charges -- against Israel, has always been given immediate priority, while serious human rights violations by Muslim nations, dictators, and mobs are shrugged off as problems "over there."

    • This silent refusal by many Muslims to condemn attacks that are openly inspired by Islam does not come from aggression, but from a fear of challenging religious authority or needfully holding our own community accountable. In a post-Trump era, Muslims are not worried about what Jews, Americans or a new administration will do. Many of us fear first and foremost our own community for the ostracism and harassment we risk if we rise as a dissenting voice.

    • Extremist ideology will only change once we remove the imams and the mosque leadership who are complicit and who have unfettered access to a powerful platform. These are not people of faith; they are not spiritual leaders. They are dangerous propagandists and they need to be removed.

  • Summary: 

    Theresa May thinks that Islam is compatible with Human Rights – stated in her speech following the terrorist attack at London Bridge and Borough Market.  Read the .

    She criticises those who know they are incompatible, rejecting the clear evidence.  An important purpose of UKIP, beyond Brexit, is to force politicians to stop deceiving us regarding Islam.  Thus we must put in the effort to read the source material and collate the evidence.  Everyone in UKIP should read at least chapter 9 of the Koran, understand the terms “” and “”, and watch the videos and read the writings of scholars such as , and .

  • Summary: 
    • Not only does no other religion in Turkey, other than Islam, have the power, influence or financing of the Religious Affairs Directorate (Diyanet) -- whose budget even surpasses that of most ministries; other religions are either not officially recognized (as in the cases of Alevism and Yazidism), or are on the verge of complete governmental elimination -- as in the cases of Judaism, Greek Orthodoxy, Assyrian (Syriac) and Armenian Christianity.

    • "...[S]ince the creation of the world there is only one religion and it is the religion of Islam.... therefore, when Islam was not in that area before Mohammed came to it, it should have been there....So any place like this had to be freed, not to be conquered...And therefore, there is no Islamic occupation. If somebody occupies anything, it will always be somebody else, not the Muslims. So, there is no Islamic occupation. There is only Islamic liberation." -- Moshe Sharon, Professor Emeritus of Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies, Hebrew University of Jerusalem

    • To be effective, however, policies safeguarding religious liberty must include conducting an honest and open discussion of the history and doctrine of Islam, as well as its contemporary iteration, not as a "religion of peace" -- which, in Islam, is to occur only after the entire world has accepted Allah, as well as Islamic law, Sharia -- but as one of war and terror.

  • Summary: 

    Conclusion.

    Starting with the premise that Islamic terrorism “has nothing to do with Islam” we can logically deduce that:

    • The Sharia has nothing to do with Islam.
    • The Sunnah has nothing to do with Islam.
    • Mohammed has nothing to do with Islam.
    • The Quran has nothing to do with Islam.
    • Allah has nothing to do with Islam.

    Thus none of Islam’s foundational texts and personalities actually have anything whatsoever to do with Islam.

    To put this in a nutshell we arrive at the conclusion that: Islam has nothing to do with Islam.

    This is an example of “reductio ad absurdam” (reduction to absurdity). Thus those who peddle this line are either liars or themselves deceived.

  • Summary: 

    In a historic speech to an enthusiastic Polish crowd before the meeting of the G20 Summit leaders, US President Donald Trump  the West's battle against "radical Islamic terrorism" as the way to protect "our civilization and our way of life". Trump asked if the West had the will to survive:

    "Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to preserve our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?"

     

    • "The greatest difference is that in Europe, politics and religion have been separated from one another, but in the case of Islam it is religion that determines politics" — Zoltan Balog, Hungary's Minister for Human Resources.

    • It is no coincidence that President Donald Trump chose Poland, a country that fought both Nazism and Communism, to call on the West to show a little willingness in its existential fight against the new totalitarianism: radical Islam.

    • "Possessing weapons is one thing, and possessing the will to use them is another thing altogether". — Professor William Kilpatrick, Boston College.

  • Summary: 
    • "The whole system failed and that is what has been happening for the last 30 years. And it is PC. People are just too, too afraid to, you know, just too, too afraid to speak the truth." — Mohan Singh, founder of the Sikh Awareness Society.

    • MI5, Britain's domestic security agency, revealed that it has identified 23,000 jihadist extremists living in the country.

    • Manchester bomber Salman Abedi used taxpayer-funded student loans and benefits to bankroll the terror plot, according to the Telegraph. Abedi is believed to have received thousands of pounds in state funding in the run-up to the attack even while he was overseas receiving bomb-making training. It also emerged that the chief imam of Abedi's mosque fought with militants in Libya. The mosque was also reported to have hosted hate preachers who called for British soldiers to be killed and non-believers to be stoned to death.

    • "It is no secret that Saudi Arabia in particular provides funding to hundreds of mosques in the UK, espousing a very hardline Wahhabist interpretation of Islam. It is often in these institutions that British extremism takes root." — Tom Brake, Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman.

  • Wahhabism, Salafism and Islamism: Who Is The Enemy?

    Image: 
    Summary: 

    This essay constructs and deconstructs three main discourses created by different and opposing trends in modern Islamic thought that are normally and mistakenly lumped together as Islamism, fundamentalism, salafism, neo-salafism, Wahhabism, jihadism, political Islam, Islamic radicalism and others.

    .....

    Orthodox Sunni Muslims believe that they are the true bearers of pure Islam since the time of al-salaf and that they, therefore, have roots in al-salaf. They are represented however today by the four surviving authentic schools of Islamic jurisprudence: Hanafi, Shafi‘i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools (madhahib). This is on the one hand. On the other, the Wahhabis -- who claim to be the champion of Sunni Islam -- perceive the Sunnis as having been wrong for over ten centuries and have been living a state of pre-Islamic paganism (jahiliyya [literally, ignorance]) since they moved away from the way of al-salaf. They even accused the majority of orthodox Sunni Muslims who were living under the Ottoman caliphate and the caliphate itself of reprehensible innovation (bid‘a) and unbelief (kufr) because they had been living under a political system that is unknown to al-salaf .

    Admin: This is reminiscent of the "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin" debates in Christianity. The key issue for non-Muslims here is really the four schools of sharia law.

  • Summary: 

    The numbers elsewhere are even higher: 60% in Finland, 59% in Denmark, 59% in Norway and 56% in Sweden believe that Islam clashes with the values of their society.

    Admin: Clearly summed up in this ECHR ruling:

    ECHR Judgement Summary: "sharia law is incompatible with democracy and human rights"

    Source: “Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

    Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on sharia law, the Court found that sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention. It considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it”. According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverged from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.

    This article is a reasonable summation of British values and sharia law breaks everyone of them:

    As news of  hit the newspapers over the weekend, we should remember when, last month, the  made British values central to the fight against extremism. He didn’t refer to the abstract values liberals love to promote such as ‘respect’ and ‘tolerance’ that are so vague as to be of limited value. Instead he clearly articulated historically rooted British values:

    • democracy
    • the rule of law,
    • freedom of speech,
    • freedom of the press
    • freedom of worship

  • 47% BELIEVE FUNDAMENTAL CLASH BETWEEN ISLAM AND BRITISH VALUES

  • Country: 
    Australia
    News Date: 
    17/06/2017
    Summary: 

    A couple who both grew up as Muslims in Pakistan have told why they turned their backs on Islam. Sami Shah and Ishma Alvi, who became Australian citizens in January and live in Melbourne with their young daughter, said extremism, sexism and misogyny were key reasons why they opted out of the religion. The couple also explained the reasons for their transition by citing passages from the Quran, which Mr Shah has described as ‘maddening as a text’. An edited extract from Mr Shah’s latest book, The Islamic Republic of Australia, which details the move from Muslim to non-Muslim w

  • Country: 
    Netherlands (the)
    News Date: 
    17/06/2017
    Summary: 

    Some live in almost similar situations, such as Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard and his Swedish colleague Lars Vilks, British author Salman Rushie, Danish historian Lars Hedegaard, and others. In that sense, this documentary is also a tribute to them. What we all have in common is that we are on Islam’s death list. But what always strikes me is that I am the only elected politician on the list.

  • Summary: 

    FP: So this is why Sharia is the backbone of Islam, right?

    Kasem: Yes, it is the heart and soul of Islam. Without Sharia Islam is a toothless tiger or a poisonless snake. Sharia empowers Islam with the legal power to enforce its draconian, barbaric, uncivilized, and cruel provisions. Sharia gives Islam the arms and legs to force the world to submit to Islam.

    In many verses of the Koran Allah steadfastly announces that whoever deviates from Sharia is a kafir and he/they must be fought upon (i.e., killed) by the Muslims.

    According to ibn Kathir, in verse 2:151, Allah declares that He had sent Muhammad (as a favor) to preach the Qur'an and to teach Sharia laws which the pagans of Mecca did not know

    According to verse 4:64 Allah had sent Muhammad to invite people to obey Allah's orders, that is, Sharia laws.

    To provide more fire power, ibn Kathir say that in verse 5:44, Allah declares that whoever does not want to abide by Allah's law, Sharia, is a kafir. This includes the Christians ( 5:47 ). Mind you, in Islam, a kafir must be fought upon (killed) or forced to submit to Sharia laws.

    In verse 9:73 Allah urges the believers (i.e., the Muslims) to make war on unbelievers and hypocrites and show firmness (be harsh) against them. The eminent exegete of the Qur'an, ibn Kathir writes that Allah has commanded the Muslims to fight with sword the disbelievers, to strive against the hypocrites with tongue and has annulled lenient treatment of them. According to ibn Kathir perform with sword jihad against the disbelievers and be harsh with the hypocrites with words; this means establishing Islamic penal laws, i.e. Sharia laws against them. Ibn Kathir further says that verse 9:73 cancels verse 2:256, the so-called verse on `no compulsion' on religion.

    Here are few more Qur'anic verses which unambiguously declare the supremacy of Sharia.

    Allah will decide by His law (judgment, Sharia) between various sects (between the Jews and the Christians-ibn Abbas).27:78

    Allah is the Law-giver; He has appointed Muhammad to implement the only correct laws (Sharia laws).45:18

    Allah created the heavens and the earth to implement justice to all (Sharia law).45:22

    Muhammad is to strike hard against the unbelievers (fight them with weapons and armaments-ibn Kathir. Fight them with swords-Jalalyn), hypocrites (punish them according to Sharia laws-ibn Kathir) and to be firm (harsh) against them; the abode for the unbelievers and the hypocrites is hell...66:9

    The absolute supremacy of Sharia is upheld in the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam (1990). Article 22 of this declaration concludes that all rights and freedoms mentioned are subject to the  , which is the declaration's sole source.

    Strangely, Sharia gets furher boost when the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Willams submits to dhimmitude by espousing that certain provisions of Sharia are inevitable in the United Kingdom .

    ...

    Kasem: The most unfair element of Sharia is that it repudiates the fundamental principle of justice, that is: equality in the eye of law. In Sharia, Muslims and non-Muslims are not equal. This inequality extends even to the treatment of Muslim women. Muslim women are not treated as equal to Muslim men in the tenets of Sharia. Here is a glaring example: According to Saudi law (strictly based on Islamic Sharia) the life of a Muslim male is much higher than a non-Muslim man, and the life of female Muslim is much lower than that of Muslim man.

    For instance:

    WALL STREET JOURNAL: - The Wall Street Journal, April 9, 2002). In Saudi Arabia, the concept of blood money as per Islamic Shariat (If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation), as follows:

     

    100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man

    50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman

    50,000 riyals if a Christian man

    25,000 riyals if a Christian woman

    6,666 riyals if a Hindu man

    3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman

    That is, a Muslim man's life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman

    The inequality of Muslims and non-Muslims is enshrined in the Qur'an and hadis. Here are a few examples:

    A Muslim must not be killed for killing an infidel (Hadis and ibn Kathir's interpretation of verse 5:45 ).

    Believers and non-believers are not equal.6:50, 28:61, 32:19, 35:19-22, 38:28, 39:9, 40:58, 45:21, 59:20, 67:22, 68:35

    That is why Sharia is a great insult to a civilized world

  • Summary: 

    Interview with Abul Kasem, ex-Muslim,  author of hundreds of articles and several books on Islam including, Women in Islam. He was a contributor to the book Leaving Islam – Apostates Speak Out as well as to Beyond Jihad: Critical Views From Inside Islam. In this he was asked:  What is the Sharia/Islamic law and how does it dictate almost every single aspect of human life ?

    Kasem: To be surewe must understand why the Sharia (i.e. Islamic Law) is the life-force of Islam, and why Islam must impose (by force, if needed) the Sharia to the entire world. Once we grasp this tenet, then we can understand how and why myriad specific Sharia laws affect lives.

    The basic tenets of the Sharia emanate with the assumption that Allah has chosen the believers (i.e. the Muslims) to rule the world. It might sound fascistic, but make no mistake: the Qur’an is absolutely determined to hand over the rule of the world to the followers of Islam: more specifically, to the Bedouin Arabs. Because Islam = Arabism. In the Qur’an (3:104, 3:110) Allah says that Arabs are the best of people ever created.

    In verse 2:143 Allah says He changed the Qiblah (direction of prayer) to distinguish between Muslims and non-Muslims. , the ideological guru of the current wave of Islamists explains this verse in this manner: This constitutes the proclamation appointing the religious community (the ‘ummah’) consisting of the followers of Muhammad to religious guidance and leadership of the world. In the second place there is an allusion to the change in the direction of Prayer from Jerusalem to the Ka’bah. People of limited intelligence could see no significance in this change of direction although the substitution of Jerusalem by the Ka’bah amounted to the removal of the Children of Israel from their position of world leadership and their replacement by the ummah of Muhammad (peace be on him).

     

    Maududi, in connection with verse 2:145, even writes: To deviate from that knowledge to please others is tantamount to offending the prophetic mission and is inconsistent with the gratitude that the Prophet ought to feel for having been favored with the position of world leadership.

    In the above sentences Maududi clearly states that the Muslims are the chosen people of Allah to rule the world. This ruling must be done with Allah’s laws, which is the Sharia.

    In verse 2:150 Allah says that by instructing them to turn their faces to the sacred mosque (Kaba) He has bestowed a great favor to the Muslims. Maududi explains this favor in this manner: The ‘favour’ here refers to the position of world leadership and guidance from which God removed the children of Israel and which was then conferred upon this ummah.

    The highest reward that can be granted to a people in recognition of its righteousness is its designation, by God’s command, to the leadership of the world in order to guide the entire human race to godliness and righteousness. What is said here, therefore, is that the command to change the qiblah was a sign of installation of the Muslims to leadership. Hence, the Muslims should follow the directives of God if for no other reason than that ingratitude and disobedience might deprive them of the honour that had been bestowed upon them.

    Admin: We believe the above c;early indicates the political nature of Islam.

    See also 

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    15/06/2017
    Summary: 

    Professional atheist Richard Dawkins told an audience this week that Islam is “the most evil religion in the world,” and therefore must be combatted. While opposed to all religion, the British evolutionary biologist and author of The God Delusion has been rethinking his  and insisting that certain distinctions must be made between one

  • Summary: 

    At a Party meeting, the Party leader addresses the audience: “All of you will be hanged tomorrow. Do you have questions?”

    Silence.

    The Party leader: “I will repeat the question. Tomorrow you all will be hanged. Does anybody want to say anything?”

    A timid voice is heard from the audience: “Shall we bring our own rope and soap or they will provide it to us?”

    This was a Soviet anecdote of the 70s.

    The world of Quisling’s followers, barbarian colonizers, and a submissive, or at best frightened, murmuring herd — this is the Western Europe of the 21st century

  • Summary: 

    Dr. Eric Ormsby, a Professor of Islamic Studies at McGill University wrote a book review of Feisal Abdul Rauf's  which appeared in the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, August 4, 2004.

    Ormsby's review displays the two overlapping tiers of apologetics which pervade contemporary print media presentations of Islam, distorting or fully concealing basic historical realities. The treacly apologism of Feisal Abdul Rauf and his ilk persuades only those who are devoid of any understanding of Islamic theology and history; however, the faint-hearted "critique" of Abdul Rauf provided by Professor Ormsby, is more damaging, because in the end, it serves only to further obfuscate the truth. I will support this contention by elaborating on four specific points Ormsby addresses in his review.

  • Summary: 

    The daily mass killings, terror, persecutions and family executions committed by the followers of Islam are nauseating, and the ingenuity behind the attacks — always looking for new and more effective ways of killing and terrorizing people — is astonishing: hijacking jumbo jets and flying them into skyscrapers, hunting unarmed and innocent people with grenades and automatic rifles in shopping malls, planting bombs in one’s own body, using model airplanes as drones, attaching large rotating blades to pickup trucks and using them as human lawn movers, killing family members with acid or fire, hanging people publicly from cranes in front of cheering crowds, etc.- in addition to stabbing people in the back, shooting parents in front of their children, slitting throats of sleeping babies, etc.

    It makes one ask oneself: what creates such lack of empathy and almost playful and creative attitude towards murdering perceived enemies?

    ....

    The problem with Islam and Muslim culture is that there are so many psychological factors pushing its followers towards a violent attitude against non-Muslims that a general violent clash is — at least from a psychological perspective — inevitable. With such strong pressure and such strong emotions within such a large group of people — all pitched against us — we are facing the perfect storm, and I see no possibilities of turning it around. For people to change, they have to want it, to be allowed to change, and to be able to change — and only a tiny minority of Muslims have such lucky conditions.

    Far too many people underestimate the power of psychology embedded in religion and culture. As we have already seen, no army of social workers, generous welfare states, sweet-talking politicians, politically correct journalists or democracy-promoting soldiers can stop these enormous forces. Sensible laws on immigration and Islamization in our own countries can limit the amount of suffering, but based on my education and professional experience as a psychologist for Muslims, I estimate that we will not be able to deflect or avoid this many-sided, aggressive movement against our culture.

    I do believe that we, as a democratic and educated society can become focused and organized concerning the preservation of our values and constitutions, can win this ongoing conflict started by the often inbred followers of Sharia. The big question is how much of our dignity, our civil rights, and our blood, money and tears will we lose in the process.

  • Summary: 

    This idea that Muslims will quickly and en masse adopt Nawaz’s new age, spliff-smoking, liberal version of Islam is absurd – and dangerous. Considering the widespread hate and mistrust Muslims have for him and his organisation and the zero credibility he and Quilliam have amongst Muslims, unfortunately I have to reluctantly ask: who is his target audience?

    Exactly what, or who, are you actually trying to reform, Mr Nawaz?

    Everything about the words contained in the Koran and the example of Islam’s prophet Mohammed is the antithesis of free will, autonomy, freedom and democracy. If you sat down at a desk today to design an ideology with the express intention of being as hostile towards and incompatible with western civilisation as possible, you would produce Islam. The literal translation of the word Islam is “submission”.

    Islam is a highly structured system of governance with roughly 6,000 sharia laws that dictate the actions and behaviours of its followers, both in public and private life. It’s a holistic system that commands Muslims to obey the will of Allah and follow the example of Mohammed as the path to eternal salvation.

    Secularism is a betrayal of Islamic teachings, those teachings being unambiguously detailed in the Koran, Sura and Hadiths. Those instructions make clear that each and every Muslim should strive to live in accordance with Islamic law. To reject, criticise, or attempt to undo codified Islamic jurisprudence is considered highly blasphemous – a crime carrying the death penalty. This is the main reason the majority of Muslims are so hostile to any talk of reformation.

    In essence Islamic “reformers” such as Nawaz are asking Muslims to denounce the life and teachings of the prophet of Islam and the words of the creator of the universe.

    The Koran is believed to be the literal and perfect word of Allah. The text is said to be immutable (unchangeable), timeless.

  • Summary: 

    Anne Marie Waters talks about the need for an open, nuanced debate about the merits of Islam and her campaign, For Britain.

  • Summary: 

    Anne-Marie Waters gives her argument against Islam being a peaceful religion. 
    SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► 
    FOLLOW Anne-Marie Waters on twitter @ 

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    02/11/2016
    Summary: 

    Tackling should be “the next big battle” for  following its successes over migration and the European Union, leadership candidate  has said.

  • Summary: 

    But what Holland at no point mentioned was why he had not gone to film in another city which – mistakenly or otherwise – is far more important in Islam: Mecca. The reason is that Holland is not a Muslim and so is not only unable to film in Mecca but also is not allowed to go there.

    .....

    ‘The British Muslim community will not allow Channel 4 to distort our faith and our history.’

    Is that a threat? It doesn’t seem a very moderate way of responding to an interesting programme. He concludes:

    ‘The Ramadhan Foundation calls on Channel 4 to apologise for this programme, withdraw it from online viewing and also order an immediate inquiry into why this was allowed to be broadcast. How many Muslims Scholars, community leaders were given a copy of this programme before transmission? Whether historic facts in relation to Islam were verified by the presenter and who his sources were.’

    Gosh! Did Channel 4 know that they had to pass their programmes by ‘community leaders’? Who will censor programmes for the rest of us?

  • Summary: 

    With so much of the world focused on ISIS these days, a group which uses and is absolutely dependent on the Qur'an and their prophet Muhammad for their authority, it is important to look at just how authoritative they both are historically.

  • The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom

    Image: 

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

    The Third Choice provides a compelling introduction to Islam on the basis of its primary sources, the Qur'an and the life of Muhammad. Topics covered include the sharia; interpretation of the Qur'an; abrogation; women's rights (including female genital mutilation); lawful deception (taqiyya); Muhammad's responses to opposition; Islamic antisemitism; religious freedom; and prospects for reforming Islam. 

    After this critical introduction of Islam, there follows an explanation and critique of Islam's policy for non-Muslims living under Islamic conditions.  The doctrine of the three choices (conversion, the sword, or the dhimma pact of surrender to Islam) is explained, including an analysis of the meaning of tribute payments (jizya) made by non-Muslims (dhimmis) to their Muslim conquerors.  Durie describes the impact of dhimmitude on the human rights of non-Muslims in Islamic contexts around the world today, in the light of global Islamic resurgence and advancing Islamization, including pressure being exerted through the United Nations for states to conform to sharia restrictions on freedom of speech.  

    The Third Choice offers indispensable keys for understanding current trends in global politics, including the widening impact of sharia revival, deterioration of human rights in Islamic societies, jihad terrorism, recurring patterns of Western appeasement, interfaith dialogue initiatives, and the increasingly fraught relationship between migrant Muslim communities in the West and their host societies.

  • Summary: 

    I see a lot of love in Christianity, I see a lot of anger and hate in Islam,” stated my anonymous Iranian-American interlocutor to me in his condominium building manager’s office. My interview partner related a revealing personal spiritual and geographic journey away from his boyhood Islamic faith and Iranian homeland to an adult Christian conversion in America.

  • Summary: 
    • "There are plenty of private Muslim schools and madrasas in this city. They pretend that they all preach tolerance, love and peace, but that isn't true. Behind their walls, they force-feed us with repetitive verses of the Qur'an, about hate and intolerance." — Ali, an 18-year-old of French origin, whose father was radicalized.

    • "In England, they are free to speak. They speak only of prohibitions, they impose on one their rigid vision of Islam but, on the other hand, they listen to no-one, most of all those who disagree with them." — Yasmina, speaking of extremist Muslims in the UK.

    • "Birmingham is worse than Molenbeek" -- the Brussels borough that The Guardian described as "becoming known as Europe's jihadi central." — French commentator, republishing an article by Rachida Samouri.

  • Summary: 

    Fantasy Islam: A game in which an audience of non-Muslims wish with all their hearts that Islam was a “Religion of Peace,” and a Muslim strives to fulfill that wish by presenting a personal version of Islam that has little foundation in Islamic Doctrine.

  • Summary: 

    Progress can never be made if we can't satirise Islam, says Maajid Nawaz. The LBC presenter said we need the right to be able to blaspheme and criticise religion, because if people can't express their opinion verbally - they will turn to violence. Maajid passionately made the case for encouraging satire of Islam after writer and campaigner, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, said: 'We've had Life of Brian, now we need Life of Muhammad'.

  • Country: 
    Egypt
    News Date: 
    12/04/2017
    Summary: 

    For years, Egyptian Copt Michel Fahmy could hear a Muslim preacher invoking God’s wrath on Christians in sermons blared over loudspeakers from a mosque near his home. The radical message, he says, is a reason for jihadist attacks on his minority like the twin bombings of churches on Sunday that killed 45 people.

  • A selection of recent interesting tweets:

    Australian 'Your allowed freedom of speech, within the limits we set'

  • Country: 
    Australia
    News Date: 
    03/04/2017
    Summary: 

    Islamic organisations have dodged scrutiny by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, which has spent four years probing numerous religious organisations but made no inquiries into Islam.

  • Country: 
    Austria
    News Date: 
    05/04/2017
    Summary: 

    In Europe, Muslims have greater freedom to follow their faith than Christians do, the head of an anti-discrimination group has said. Martin Kugler, Austrian historian and founder of the Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination Against Christians in Europe, said Christians were being marginalised on the continent while Muslims are treated much more carefully.

  • Summary: 
    • British multiculturalists are feeding Islamic fundamentalism. Muslims do not need to become the majority in the UK; they just need gradually to Islamize the most important cities. The change is already taking place.

    • British personalities keep opening the door to introducing Islamic sharia law. One of the leading British judges, Sir James Munby, said that Christianity no longer influences the courts and these must be multicultural, which means more Islamic. Rowan Williams, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, and Chief Justice Lord Phillips, also suggested that the English law should "incorporate" elements of sharia law.

    • British universities are also advancing Islamic law. The academic guidelines, "External speakers in higher education institutions", provide that "orthodox religious groups" may separate men and women during events. At the Queen Mary University of London, women have had to use a separate entrance and were forced to sit in a room without being able to ask questions or raise their hands, just as in Riyadh or Tehran.

Pages

Subscribe to Islam