Compare this to the foul ISIS videos you’ve seen:
by Raymond Ibrahim
What relationship does the Islamic State have to Islam?
“Absolutely nothing” is the answer almost every Western politician gives. For example, U.S. President Obama adamantly stated in a televised speech that the Islamic State “is not Islamic.”
This begs the question: How does one determine what is—and is not—Islamic?…
…Slavery and Rape
Again, from the highest scriptural authority in Islam—the Koran—to the greatest role model for Muslims—Muhammad; from Islamic history to current events, the sexual enslavement of “infidel” women is a canonical aspect of Islamic civilization.
Koran 4:3 permits men to have sex with “what your right hands possess,” a term categorically defined by the ulema as “infidel” women captured during the jihad.
The prophet of Islam himself kept and copulated with concubines conquered during the jihad. One captured Jewish woman, Safiya bint Huyay, was “married” to Muhammad right after the prophet had tortured her husband to death to reveal hidden treasure.
And before this, Muhammad’s jihadis had slaughtered Safiya’s father and brothers.
Unsurprisingly, she later confessed that “Of all men, I hated the prophet the most—for he killed my husband, my brother, and my father,” right before marrying (or, less euphemistically, raping) her.
Khalid bin Walid—the “Sword of Allah” and hero for aspiring jihadis around the world—raped another woman renowned for her beauty, Layla, on the battlefield—right after he severed her “apostate” husband’s head, lit it on fire, and cooked his dinner on it.
What of wide-scale massacres? In this video, for example, the Islamic State appears herding, humiliating, and marching off hundreds of male hostages (the number often given is 1,400) to their trenches, where Islamic State members proceed to shoot them in the head—all while the black flag of Islam waves.
In fact, the prophet himself ordered merciless massacres of “infidels.” After the battle of Badr, where Muhammad and the first Muslims prevailed over their enemies, Muhammad ordered the execution of a number of hostages. When one of the hostages, ‘Uqba, implored the prophet to spare him, saying “But who will look after my children, O Muhammad?” the latter responded, “Hell.”
More famously, Muhammad ordered the execution of approximately 700 Jewish men from the Banu Qurayza tribe. According to the sira account, after the Jewish tribe surrendered to his siege, Muhammad had all the men marched off to where ditches were dug and promptly executed by beheading—just like the Islamic State marched off and executed its victims near trenches in the video….
by Roger Kimball
….Let’s contrast the example and the teaching of Christ with the example and teaching of Mohammed. Christ is often denominated “the Prince of Peace.” He said things like “suffer the little children” to come to him. And Mohammed? “He raided villages and towns,” Ali Sina points out, and
massacred unarmed men, beheaded his captives, raped their women and sold them as slaves. His successors, the so-called “rightly guided Caliphs” and their successors did the same. These are the very things the Wahhabis advocate and Islamic State is doing.
As for Mohammed and little children, there is of course the story of Aisha, the youngest of Mohammed’s wives. She was married to Muhammad at the age of “six or seven” but she stayed in her parents’ home until the age of “nine or ten.”
Yes, there are people who describe themselves as Muslim “reformers.” They do not want to go back to the original teachings of Muhammed — they look slightingly upon massacring unarmed men, shrink back from beheading folks, and want to have nothing to do with raping women or encouraging slavery.
But they also, Ali Sina points out, want to “acknowledge the legitimacy of Muhammad as a prophet of God.”
How do they manage that trick? “How,” Ali Sina asks, “can we tell people Muhammad was a true prophet, but don’t believe him – that his message was from God, but don’t follow it? Furthermore, isn’t it what the majority of Muslims already doing? Most Muslims don’t practice the violent parts of the Koran. As long as Islam is accepted as a true religion there will always be a minority who will want to practice it fully and honestly.”
Item: Yusra Hussein is a 15-year-old British Muslim of Somali origin. One day she just disappeared. The next thing her parents knew, there she was a “jihadi bride” who had gone to fight with Islamic State. “If it can happen to Yusra,” her aunt said, “it can happen to anyone. She was just a normal, young girl. She was a home girl. There was no anger, no frustration. We had no idea.”
“Thousands of young Muslims join Islamic State,” Ali Sina notes.
The great majority come from moderate Muslim families. It is easy to radicalize them. You ask them whether they believe in the Koran and they respond “yes.” Then you read it to them and show them that God enjoins jihad, that their parents who prefer this world to the next are hypocrites, and the Koran orders true believers to neither associate with the hypocrites nor take them as friends and guardians, even if they are fathers and brothers.
Kids understand this. It is a no-brainer. Their parents also understand it. But they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to live in comfort and at the same time enter the Islamic paradise.
Telling the truth about Islam “offends” Muslims and their well-meaning supporters. But failing to tell the truth about Islam makes room for the Nidal Hasans of the world. Hasan was the Army psychiatrist who went on rampage at Ft. Hood, slaughtering 13 innocent people and injuring 30 others. He shouted “Allahu Akbar” — Allah is Great — while murdering those people and yet the Obama administration insisted that what the world witnessed was merely an instance of “workplace violence,” not an example of Islamic terrorism. “Oh but that’s just one example, one ‘violent extremist.’” What do you call the response to the Danish cartoons of Mohammed? How about the nightclub bombing in Bali? TheBoston marathon massacre? The “shoe bomber”? The “underwear bomber.” The perpetrators of 9/11? The attempt to sink the USS Cole? The London subway bombing? Et very much cetera. It is all part of what what one U.S.-based Islamist cell called the “Grand Jihad,” which aims at “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging’ its miserable house . . . so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”
Seems pretty clear, doesn’t it? The important thing about Ali Sina’s article is its clear-eyed appreciation of some fundamental distinctions. “Islam is either from God or it isn’t. If it is then we have to accept it because that is what the Koran says. If we don’t, we should not complain when Muslims kill us. They are following the religion we acknowledged to be true. If Islam is not true, we better tell it fearlessly.”
Ali Sina ends with some good advice. I wish more Western pundits, to say nothing of Western politicians, would heed it. “Stop tiptoeing around lest you offend Muslims’ sensitivity. Take sides. . . .Truth hurts the delicate sensitivity of Muslims, but lies kill. Thousands are killed every day to uphold a lie. If this is not insanity what is?”
by Magda Borham
…Followers of Islam believe they are the only righteous people on earth and the only nation who hold the truth. Muslims believe Islam is the only true religion.
Due to this Muslims believe everyone else who has a different religion, or has no faith and does not follow Islam are“Kaffirs” (a derogatory term means unbelievers). Muslims are influenced by many frivolous koranic verses and hadiths (words and deeds of their prophet) teaching them they are the best nation that has ever emerged on earth. For example, according to surat (verse) 3:110 from the Quran, Allah said to Muslims: “Thus We have made you the best nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad) be a witness over you”.
Muslims are in your country, but they live not to integrate or to be part of your society or at least to be equal with others, but to dominate and to be the only privileged group. Muslims achieve this by turning you into a second class citizen in your own country.
They immigrate to your countries holding the same belief system that turned their lives into hell on earth. This same belief, same religion made their lives unsupportable in their original societies. It is the same religion that transformed their countries into war zones of endless conflicts. Muslims now homeless want to apply this system and live and apply the same destruction in your own country.
Muslims are not in your country to help build it or to make it prosper. Many believe this, including politicians. Muslims are in your country to drain its resources and to suck the blood out of society. For example Muslims represent almost 90% of all your country’s welfare recipients.
A real Muslim’s loyalty is not and will never be to your countries but to the global Islamic “Umma” (nation) only.
At this point please don’t get me wrong. I am not saying that ALL Muslims are bad; But we have no choice but to take care of them all because they ALL believe totally in this evil ideology, but they do ALL believe in an evil man, a warlord, The Prophet of Islam.
In the world of snakes and vipers, the average person can’t distinguish between the poisonous snake and the non-poisonous snake; the average person has no choice but to avoid all kind of snakes.. Since the world did not invent a tool able to detect who is the “devout” Muslim and who is the “nominal” Muslim or a device to detect who is telling the truth and who practising “taqqiyah تقية” (telling lies to the unbelievers in order to advance the cause of Islam), so it is wise to take your precautions against ALLMuslims and not accept them as immigrants or asylum seekers, they left us no choice but to avoid them all.
It’s no ones fault that Muslims put themselves in this situation, since not one single Muslim has the will, the courage or indeed the ability to stop his fellow believers from harming others in the name of his religion. Not one single Muslim group has the guts or the will to organize manifestations to condemn Islamic terrorism, like those organized to condemn cartoons and youtube videos criticizing their “Prophet”, not one single mosque or Imam or Islamic organisation can teach against those violent texts in the Quran and the Hadith (words, deeds and biography of the prophet of Islam) which incite thousands of Muslims to commit acts of terrorism, because they can’t go against their own islamic books ….
Until Muslims can accept responsibility and act to change, then they have no right to demand respect. Until then they have no right to endlessly act like robots and repeat that Islam is a “religion of peace”. This claim has absolutely no value or credibility now. Muslims can’t ask the rest of the world to respect them as they don’t respect others and continue to impose their laws and way of life on others.
Golden Rule’s don’t exist in Islam. With Muslims their thoughts are based as if they are travelling long a one way road. One direction ONLY, one direction. This has been the same since the time of their prophet in the 7th century and continues to this day… Muslims demand tolerance, but they don’t have to tolerate anybody else in other societies or faiths…They demand accommodation, but they don’t have to accommodate anybody else…They demand respect but they don’t have to respect anybody else….Remember, they immigrate to your western countries and think that’s your duty to integrate to them, not the reverse.
Muslims don’t understand that respect is earned not given…
….Indeed, while many are now aware of the Koran’s and by extension Sharia’s justification for slaves, sexual or otherwise, fewer are willing to embrace the fact that the prophet of Islam himself kept and copulated with concubines conquered during the jihad.
One little-known story is especially eye-opening:
During Muhammad’s jihad on the Jews of Khaybar, he took for himself from among the spoils of war one young woman, a teenager, Safiya bint Huyay, after hearing of her beauty. (Earlier the prophet had bestowed her on another Muslim jihadi, but when rumor of her beauty reached him, the prophet reneged and took her for himself.)
Muhammad “married” Safiya hours after he had her husband, Kinana, tortured to death in order to reveal hidden treasure. And before this, the prophet’s jihadis slaughtered Safiya’s father and brothers.
While Islamic apologists have long tried to justify this account—often by saying that Muhammad gave her the honor of “marriage” as opposed to being a concubine and that she opted to convert to Islam—they habitually fail to cite what Islamic sources record, namely Baladhuri’s ninth centuryKitab Futuh al-Buldan (“Book of Conquests”).
According to this narrative, after the death of Muhammad, Safiya confessedthat “Of all men, I hated the prophet the most—for he killed my husband, my brother, and my father,” before “marrying” (or, less euphemistically, raping) her.
So there it is. Muhammad seized for himself as rightfully earned booty (orghanima) a young woman; he took her after killing everyone dear to her—husband, father, brothers, etc.
And, according to authoritative Islamic sources, she hated him for it.
If that is not rape, what is?…
by DANIEL GREENFIELD
….Even few apologists for Islam will defend Saudi Arabia for the simple reason that it is indefensible. The media will run the occasional story about the House of Saud’s commitment to reform, much as Charles Manson keeps committing to becoming a better person, but even they don’t really believe it. Yet even though Saudi Arabia is the heartland of Sunni Islam, and its fortunes shape and control mosques and teachings around the world, they insist on treating Islam and Saudi Arabia as two separate things.
It is brutally telling that the two centers of Islam, Saudi Arabia for the Sunnis and Iran for the Shiites, are genuinely horrifying places. Neither can remotely be associated with tolerance or human rights. It is simple common sense that the spread of Islam will make Western countries more like Saudi Arabia and Iran, rather than less like them.
If Saudi Arabia is not an example that we wish to emulate, then why must we bodily incorporate the religion of Mecca and Medina into London and Los Angeles? What other possible outcome do we imagine that there will be but fewer rights and more violence, dead women, abused children, bomb plots and polygamy?
There are two Islams. The real Islam of the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia and an imaginary Islam that exists only in the mosques of air and card table Korans of academics apologists and political pundits who have decided that Islam cannot be bad, because no religion can be bad, not even one which kills and kills, it must just be misunderstood.
But then why not tell the Grand Mufti that he has misunderstood his own religion, the religion that he and his ancestors have dedicated themselves to purifying and reforming back to its roots? Telling him that would be a dangerous thing on his own turf, but it would also be foolish. The Grand Mufti’s controversial statements contain nothing that Mohammed had not said.
Can the founder of a religion misunderstand his own teachings?
Islam is savage, intolerant, cruel and expansionistic, not due to a misunderstanding, but an understanding of the worst aspects of human nature. It is what it is and no amount of wishing will make it otherwise.
We have opened the door to the desert and a hot wind blows through into the northern climes. Either we shut the door or get used to living in the Saudi desert.