By Bill Warner

When you read the comments section of an article about Islam, you will see the argument: I have some Muslim friends and they are good people. The conclusion: good Muslims mean that Islam is good. If the talk is face-to-face, the person may ask: Do you have any Muslim friends? There is a hidden implication that if you do not, then you don’t really know anything about Islam and you could be a bigot.

What is actually going on? The Kafir (non-Muslim) with Muslim friends does not know any real facts about Islam and wants to move the argument to feelings, not facts. If the Muslim friend is nice, Islam is nice. There is no need to know any facts about Islam. And, if Islam is nice, then speaking against it is bigotry.

It is amazing how much people can talk about Islam and never mention a single fact. It is easy to tell if someone is speaking about Islam factually. A fact-based discussion will include the Koran and the Sunna, which means that the words Mohammed and Allah will be heard. If there is no Mohammed or Allah, then the discussion is not about the facts of Islam; it is about opinions that come from the media, authorities and the web.

Here are questions to ask people with Muslim friends.

· Do you have any Muslim apostate friends?

An apostate is one who has left Islam and under Sharia law may be murdered. Who would know more about the true nature of Islam than someone who knows it at the core of their being? The apostate knows both sides of the story.
Here are other questions to ask those with Muslim friends:

· Do you have any Christian friends from the Middle East?
· Do you have any Armenian, Serbian or Coptic friends?

These people have suffered cultural and religious annihilation by Islam over the past 1400 years, shouldn’t you also meet them? About 60 million Christians have been murdered over the last 1400 years, and Armenians, Serbians, Copts (Egyptians) and the rest of the Christians of the Middle East furnished the body count. Doesn’t it make sense to talk to who has personal experience in engaging Islam?

There are other questions to be asked. There are 13 verses in the Koran that say that a Muslim is not the friend of a Kafir. How can this not be talked about? According to Islam, we are Kafirs. Why can’t friends talk about such things?

Koran 4:144 Believers! Do not take kafirs as friends over fellow believers. Would you give Allah a clear reason to punish you?

What this means is that a Muslim may be friendly with a Kafir, but if a Muslim has a choice between favoring a Kafir or a Muslim, he will favor the Muslim. Why can’t this be discussed among friends?

Now to the most critical question: Is a Muslim ever really the friend of a Kafir? Any Muslim who fully accepts the doctrine of Islam cannot be the true friend of a Kafir—friendly, yes, but not a true friend. If he is a true friend, then he is not obeying the Koran and not following the Sunna of Mohammed.

The difference between friendly and a friend is that a Muslim who is true friend will sometimes choose the Kafir’s side in a dispute about it. A friendly Muslim will be pleasant, but will always choose Islam’s side in any politics or dispute about Islam. A Muslim friend who is a true friend will listen to reasonable criticisms and occasionally tell you that you have a point there. The Muslim Arabic FBI translators who cheered on 9/11 were quite friendly, but chose Islam over the Kafirs on 9/11.

This does not mean that a person, who calls himself or herself a Muslim, cannot be a real friend. They may see the Golden Rule as more attractive than Islam’s dualistic ethics. If they can see the other person as not being a Kafir, but a human being, then they can be a true friend.

It is important to see that these ideas concern implications about the practical application of Islamic doctrine. In this case the Islamic doctrine of friends is examined. These ideas are not about any particular person who calls themselves a Muslim. Generally, to be a Muslim, you must act according to Islamic doctrine. However, the term Muslim has come to mean anybody with any degree of adherence to Islamic doctrine, however if such a person adopts the Kafir Golden Rule then they can be a fine person and a fine friend.

This friend business is perhaps one of the worst parts of the Islamic ideology and shows how great the divide is between Islam and all other doctrines.

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

A favorite comeback for someone who is critical of Islam is—you are Islamophobic. Never mind that the term phobic means an irrational fear. Really, the charge is that you are irrational AND a bigot. A bigot is immoral and a hater and has no possible reason for their views.

There is a cure for bigotry. If you are a bigot, learning about the subject of bigotry can cure it. Clint Eastwood’s character in Grand Torino started out as a bigot about the Hmong Vietnamese who moved in next door. As he got to know them, he changed and gave the ultimate sacrifice of his life to help them. The cure for his bigotry was getting to know more about his neighbors, the Hmong.

Notice this does not say that as you get to know them, you will always like them better. There are people and groups that the more you know them, the less you like them. As you see what they do and how they think, you may actually start to fear them. Not being a bigot doesn’t mean that you love everybody and what they do. In the sixties, the Black Panthers had a revolutionary, “stick it to the man”, image that was cool. However, the more you got to know them and see what they did, you learned that the Panthers were serious racist thugs and dangerous to society. So just because someone is “oppressed” does not mean that they are decent people.

Want to see if you are an Islamophobe? Let’s presume that you don’t like Islamic doctrine, Sharia law as an example, and would like to take the test to see if you are a bigot. Remember, if you are a bigot, then the more you get to know Islam, the better you will feel.

Here are some concepts from Islamic doctrine, so that you can understand it better. Islam says that non-Muslims are Kafirs. Allah hates Kafirs and He even plots against them. Kafirs can be tortured, deceived, enslaved, crucified, raped and robbed. How important are Kafirs to Islam? Islam has three sacred texts: Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed) and Hadith (his traditions). Look at how much of Islam is devoted to the Kafir:

If the Kafir is “bad”, then there is a lot of “bad”. How does your cultural sensitivity feel now? Feel any closer to Islam, any less afraid?

Maybe, you need a little more exposure to become warmer towards Islam. Jihad should cure your ills. Isn’t the jihad thing overblown? There are only a few verses about that, aren’t there? Look at the statistics:

Now that you are learning more about Islam, are your fears subsiding?

Still afraid? Every Muslim will tell you that Islam was the first ideology to give women their rights. If we take everything that is written about women in the Koran and rank it according to whether the woman is held in high status, equal status and lower status, we find:

How does the women’s issue strike you? Are you feeling more simpatico? Less Islamophobic?

So, you took the Islamophobia test. Now that you know Islam better, do you now understand and realize that your Islamophobia was bigoted hatred?

Surely, this test is biased. There must be some goodness in Islam for Kafirs. If you go through the Koran and pick out every single verse that offers good words, doesn’t that prove that Islam is good?

If every single verse that seems to promise good to Kafirs is counted up, then 2.6% of the verses offer good to Kafirs. But, wait! There is that contradiction and abrogation contradiction principle. The Koran is filled with verses that contradict each other and in every case of good verses, the 2.6%, are cancelled or abrogated, by later verses. The net result is 0%, nothing, is unmitigated good in the Koran for the Kafir.

You have finished the Islamophobe Test. Feel closer to Islam? Or more afraid? If you feel closer and warmer about Islam, then you were Islamophobic, but now you are cured. If not, then your fears are real, not a phobia. Islam is like the Black Panthers—the more you know, the less you like and the more you are afraid.

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink /blog/the-acid-test-for-islamophobia/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

by Kenneth Roberts

In the TV sitcom ‘Green Acres’, Oliver Wendell Douglas, a New York attorney runs for public office against the popular incumbent. A rumor starts, suggesting that Douglas had been debarred as a lawyer. Though not true, the rural folk keep repeating the lie during the campaign, until everyone accepts it as an established fact… and besides, it’s highly amusing to repeat the slander. Candidate Douglas is frustrated beyond endurance. Even though he is an accomplished attorney, he doesn’t stand a chance against this entrenched prejudice.

In the Koran, Mohammed uses the same technique. All sorts of things in the Koran are no more than cartoonish misrepresentations of people and other religions, but Moslems have no problem accepting them as established facts, merely because Mohammed said so and repeated them over and over, giving them divine authority… and besides, Mohammed’s caricatures are highly amusing! Cartoons work. Hyperbole works. They entertain. They work viscerally by circumventing the intellect and appealing directly to the emotions through laughter and sneering mockery. A thing doesn’t have to be true to be fun!

Mocking outsiders is fun! It puts ‘them’ down, puts ‘us’ above them and thus dehumanizes ‘them’. ‘We’ get control of ‘them’.

According to Mohammed, not only do kafir-subhumans deserve to be mocked, but they basically lack a right to share the earth with Moslems. They are on earth by the kind permission and mercy of Moslems who magnanimously restrain themselves from removing the kafirs altogether. By mocking their legitimate overlords (the Moslems), kafirs lose their right to exist on earth. That is the Sunna, the example, of Mohammed.

In the TV episode, lawyer Douglas starts shouting, ‘I was not debarred!’ but no one hears him over the howls of bemused laughter. Mohammed discovered how effective laughing at one’s opponents could be. He mocked all who didn’t follow him, starting with the Jews, calling them sons of pigs and apes, and at other times calling them ‘donkeys carrying the Taurat’. Mohammed refused to pronounce it ‘Torah’. He distorted the names of people in the Bible as well, no doubt to make them sound funny. He told humiliating stories about Biblical heroes. Abraham had a humorous scrotal hernia. Talking rocks stole Abraham’s clothes and ran away with them. Solomon bends over and overhears the language of ants. Trees, clouds and other objects in nature come alive and speak. Such imagery could come out of Tom and Jerry, but it is there in Mohammed’s holy book revealed by his god, who only communicated with Mohammed. Mohammed also hired writers to lampoon his enemies in limericks. Mohammed could not take a joke at his own expense. No! Mohammed’s narcissism was sacred! And poking fun at it was an unforgivable act of high treason punishable by death! He had writers assassinated who lampooned him.

Of course, as with other matters, Mohammed gave himself a monopoly on cartoons. He wanted his opponents to be unarmed in the matter of satirizing him…as do pious Moslems today. Today, Moslems claim the right to satirize Jews, Americans, the British, the Pope and anyone else. But no one may satirize them. Moslems place themselves and their collective offended narcissism above comment. To criticize Moslems is an act of high treason against our divinely-appointed overlords!

We are never told why Mohammed’s narcissism needs defending more than another’s narcissism. We are merely told that Mohammed taught his followers to defend his narcissism by assassinating critics…and that this is confirmed in Islamic law.

Since Moslems claim a monopoly on lampooning, Moslems expect to fight opponents whose two hands are tied behind their backs. They expect to control all debate, so no one talks back. They expect to behead all verbal critique of Islam by removing freedom of speech from our writers, teachers and politicians. They would behead kafirs societies by silencing their leaders who are charged with hearing, speaking and thinking for the benefit of the body politick. They would silence opposition to Islam with a slice of the scimitar of censorship! This is being done by violence and threats of violence.

Mohammed considered resistance to his censorship as unspeakable insolence that must be attacked with the utmost fury! Mohammed’s narcissism would not bear the smallest slight. So he found a way to stop it. All laughter stops when a person picks up a knife. According to Mohammed, such murder pleases Allah.

When Mohammed sent out his followers armed with knives, the mockers stopped mockery in Arabia forever. Anyone who disagreed with Mohammed left the country immediately, leaving Mohammed in complete control of all communications.

Today Moslems still demand a monopoly on mockery, a monopoly on satire, a monopoly on cartoons. They want a safe position above the debate from which they can verbally lay into others. Islamic mockery goes only one way…towards the kafirs.

Mohammed’s mockery of Christian doctrines was as satirical as his mockery of the Jews. Mohammed’s slanders of Christianity are some of the worst examples of his cartooning! The easiest and most distinctive Christian doctrine to remember is that of the divine Trinity, three persons in one God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. Rather than admit he understood the clearly worded message, Mohammed intentionally distorted it as ‘Father, Mother Mary and Son of God’. He obviously knew Mary was not part of the Trinity. He knew what he was doing. He was drawing a cartoon in which he removed the Holy Ghost from the picture. The first cult object tossed from the Kaaba by Mohammed was an image of a dove, the symbol of the Holy Spirit.

Why was the Holy Ghost such a danger to Mohammed? Sometimes people reveal what frightens them by never mentioning what they fear! Mohammed never mentions the Holy Ghost. The gentle dove represents spiritual stillness, tameness and the Golden Rule. Their opposite qualities are activity, ferocity and opportunism. A world-conquering empire needed energetic warriors with the latter qualities, rather than contemplative Christian monks in a monastery preaching benevolence towards one’s enemies.

Mohammed’s ultimate mockery of Christians was to mock the Virgin Mary by flying to heaven and make her his bride. Mohammed became the father of all Christians. His mockery of Christians was then almost complete.

Practically everything Mohammed said about Christianity was a caricature and a distortion. In a final cartoon of Christianity, Mohammed claimed Jesus would return to betray and butcher his own followers and then break the crosses they possessed as the symbols of the Golden Rule! This is an astonishing cartoon caricature of everything Christians consider holy and a revelation of Mohammed’s psychology of betrayal!

The worst part of Mohammed’s cartoons is that not only is he caricaturing the original doctrines, but he then claims that his cartoon represents THE TRUE IMAGE of them! Jewish and Christian doctrines as defined by the Jews and Christians themselves are wrong! Only Mohammed’s cartoons are THE TRUE doctrines.

No professional cartoonist would ever claim that! Cartoonists live enough in reality to know that their cartoons are highly exaggerated misrepresentations emphasizing a humorous aspect of events or personalities.

If Mohammed thought his cartoons were REAL, he had obviously left reality.

Koranic cartoons misrepresenting Jews, Christians and the pluralistic, cultured Arabs of Mohammed’s day are not reality, but Mohammed’s distorted comic strips, which Moslems have accepted as THE TRUTH ever since.

Mohammed could not tell the difference between a cartoon and reality…or at least he pretended not to, if it was in his own political interest. This makes Mohammed a cynical, scheming politician, rather than a sincere spiritual leader. Was he mad or a schemer?

Mohammed’s cartoons of ‘others’ in the Koran are no more real than the evil and dehumanizing cartoons of Jews that appeared for 20 years in the Nazi propaganda newspaper, Der Stürmer. The purpose of these cartoons was the same as Mohammed’s Koranic Kafir Kartoons …to dehumanize the victims, make them out to be diseased animals and give Moslems the emotional freedom to treat these subhumans violently.

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

by Kenneth Roberts

“Hero-worship is strongest where there is least regard for human freedom.”
So said Herbert Spencer, an English philosopher. Think of North Korea, Stalinist Russia, the Red Guards of China, Hitler’s Germany, etc.

Now consider this: Wherever Mohammed is most admired, there is the lowest regard for human rights, civil liberties and political freedoms, such as Syria, Pakistan, Egypt, and Tunisia.
The reason for this lack of human rights is something that Muslims deny and block out of consciousness. Plainly, Mohammed was a dictator and an abuser of human rights. But Mohammed is said by Muslims to be perfect. It isn’t abuse if Mohammed did it.

Mohammed took away the human rights of peaceful, pluralistic, cultured people. He insulted, robbed, assassinated, enslaved, and then expelled the rest of them from their properties and ancestral homeland in Arabia. Since the hero Mohammed committed these crimes, they are justifiable and good. Today, we call Mohammed’s political program ethnic cleansing or ‘genocide.’ Aggressive ethnic cleansing is occurring today in Iran and Sudan. It is ‘good’, because the hero Mohammed did it.

Muslims imitate Mohammed, so Islam naturally creates a despotic form of government that represses women and minorities. It’s Islam’s DNA.

Islam, in theory, is a single imperial state. The constitution of Islam is the biography of Mohammed. The Koran calls Mohammed’s life ‘a beautiful example’. Muslims know this is true because Mohammed wrote it in the Koran.

Mohammed struggled (jihad) to create a monocultural society based on the model of the anthill. The queen ant rules; the soldier ants all think the same way, do their dance and attack the same external enemies. Alien animals (such as aphids) are either parasitized by ants or killed or expelled. Ants go out regularly to destroy other anthills.

In the ideology of Mohammed, this is the perfect model for Islamic society. There is even a chapter in the Koran called ‘The Ants’ and another called ‘The Bee’. It is easy to see why Mohammed felt these animals ran ideal societies.

Mohammed didn’t rule by popular vote. Mohammed’s god told Muslims repeatedly to obey him. Whatever Mohammed decided, Gabriel always confirmed it shortly thereafter with a message from Allah himself. Thus Mohammed was never wrong. He ruled by divine decree. Allah constantly confirmed Mohammed’s hero status in the Koran that was written by Mohammed! Mohammed further claimed he was the owner of the earth and that Allah Almighty had created the universe for the benefit of Mohammed alone! This is a universal political claim. Mohammed said so. Mohammed is a hero, so it must be true. A true hero would not call himself a hero.

Muslims are lost in hero-worship.

Hero-worship of Mohammed is defended by law in all Islamic countries. Only hero-worship of Mohammed is ever expressed in the public domain. Dissent about Mohammed’s hero status is never heard in Islamic countries, because ordinary Muslims, like the ants in their hill, immediately and instinctively rush to neutralize aliens, sting and eliminate them. Think of the cartoon riots! Think of the Teddy Bear crisis. Think of the pursuit of critics and apostates from Islam, how they are murdered by their own families or hunted by ordinary Muslims acting as vigilantes. The greatest crime in the world is to express scepticism about the hero status of Mohammed.

If an alien animal enters the anthill, perfect harmony and unity is quickly restored. The alien is surrounded by ordinary ants and cut to pieces. In Islamic countries, there is no real pluralism or the chaotic differences of opinion found in full democracies. Alien animals (such as aphids) are only allowed into an anthill so they may be parasitized for the benefit of the ants. In Islamic countries, the anthill or the beehive is the model for the organization of society. In Islamic countries, kafirs may work for Muslims, but not lead or rule over them. That is Mohammed’s method and thus it is the Islamic ideal.

Hero-worship of Mohammed is everywhere in the Islamic state. So, for decisions to be perfectly acceptable, leaders must constantly appeal to his heroic example. If Mohammed did it, it must be ‘good’. Logic has nothing to do with it.

Mohammed never defended the human rights of kafirs. In Mohammed’s Medina, jihad occurred on the average of every six weeks. Medieval Islamic jurisprudence demanded a minimum of attacks. Unprovoked jihad expeditions against kafirs should be made a minimum of once yearly . The human rights of kafirs are unimportant, since jihad against them must take place so frequently and the very purpose of jihad is to remove the human rights of kafirs. This cannot take place in a democracy.

Ordinary Muslims assume Islam is benign, so they never concern themselves with the human rights of kafirs. Besides, kafirs have misfortunes coming to them, because they did not submit to Islam. Either way, no empathy is ever wasted on kafirs. Supremacists never apologize.

Only the politics of Islam are of concern to the kafirs. The only that kafirs care about are the things that affect our rights and our pluralistic free societies. Mohammed’s method invades and destroys kafirs and their culture, just as anthills expand to annihilate neighboring anthills. This is the traditional jihad method: Invade, colonize, and then annihilate.

Mohammed is a hero, the perfect man, and so ‘good’ Muslims use Mohammed’s monocultural model. This is why Muslims always strive (jihad) to create a monoculture of hero-worshipping wherever they go.
Kenneth Roberts is interested in global affairs, military history and the music of Mozart.

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

Look at your next airline ticket and you will find a “Security Fee”. What is the Security Fee that was passed after September 11, 2001? It is an Islam tax. It is more money out of an American’s pocket to pay for the privilege of living with Muslims amongst us.

It turns out that we pay an enormous amount of money for our life with Islam. Let’s look at a list of expenses that we bear because of Islamic ideology. If there were no Islam we would not have the Transportation Security Administration, Homeland Security, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, all that so-called terrorist work by the FBI, rebuilding the World Trade Center and who knows what else. The Iraq war has cost about $700 billion, the Afghan war has cost about $250 billion and all of the government agencies cost in the neighborhood of tens of billions per year. We are up to at least a TRILLION dollars of our Islam tax. That little $10 Security Fee may seem small, but that is for every round trip ticket sold in the US. What will the trial in NYC for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed cost? Millions of dollars. And the hits just keep coming.

Another part of the Islam tax is the jizyah (the dhimmi tax) that we call foreign aide. We pay various Islamic governments, including Egypt, Pakistan, the so-called Palestinians and others. Why do we pay the jizyah? We want to be friends (Never mind the 12 verses in the Koran that say that Muslims are never the friends of kafirs, unbelievers).

We are bringing Muslim refugees into America where they receive more benefits than American citizens, another Islam tax.
Why did Islam attack the World Trade Towers? Because they were the World TRADE Towers, an economic target. What was the purpose? To destroy the economy of America.

The Islam tax is a trillion dollars and counting. If we did not have this tax, it would certainly ease the economic crunch we have today.
This economic squeeze is 1400 years old. Mohammed created jihad, civilizational war. His concept of war was very sophisticated and included all forms of force against kafirs. He used threats, spies, secret agents, slavery, sex, propaganda, assassinations, deception, religious attacks, and the destruction of kafir economies.

As soon as Mohammed started his jihad, he warred against the economy of the kafirs. He kept up a running attack on the trade caravans of Mecca. When he attacked one tribe of Jews in Medina, he destroyed their economic base—their date palm plantations. This act was against the Arab customs of war, but Allah said it was a good thing. When he attacked Taif, he destroyed their plantations as well. Economic war.
One of his last acts was to attack the Christians north of Medina. Once he had crushed them, he made them pay the jizyah tax (the dhimmi tax). He did the same to the Jews of Khaybar. The jizyah tax was 50% of their income.

All Islam has to do is to keep up the attack. It does not matter whether they win or lose a particular battle. The more Islam practices jihad, the more we deny it and create some governmental nightmare that avoids the ideological war with Islam, but costs a fortune. Our self-deception is bankrupting us.

Islam produces poverty. Without oil, the income to all of the Arabic nations is less than that of Spain. This is not an accident. Mohammed was a businessman, but after he became a prophet, all of the money he made came from the loot from his victims, not a great business model. Mohammed knew how to bleed his enemies dry. We are bleeding today as a result of the Islamic war against the kafirs.

But Islam does not just tax kafirs for money. Kafirs have to submit to Sharia law and this means the loss of freedoms. Only Muslims are allowed to dictate what is taught about Islam in our schools. Islam gains the benefits of a deceitful history lesson, and we lose our freedom of speech. This is a tax on our Constitutional freedoms.

Everyday we submit a little more to Sharia law when we allow Muslims to take time off to pray at work and school. Article 6 of our Constitution says that our Constitution is the law of the land, but we are submitting to the demands of Sharia law when we declare that the sports facilities must be divided in use so that Muslim women can obey Sharia laws about mixing sexes. Our sovereignty decreases and Sharia law gains. This is a tax against our laws.

So now in America, kafirs are poorer and Muslims are richer because of Islam.

copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

After a murderous jihad at Fort Hood or the Christmas day airplane bombing attempt, did you hear: “Of course, not all Muslims are bad?” That brings up the question of how do you even tell if a Muslim is bad? Or good?

First off, what is a Muslim? A Muslim is a person who follows the doctrine of Islam. When that same person, does something that does not follow the doctrine of Islam, they are not a Muslim. The common idea is that anyone who says that they are a Muslim has their every action and word dictated by Islam. Put another way, every Muslim is seen as perfect follower of Islam at all times and circumstances. However, the truth is that a “Muslim” is not always a Muslim. When they do not follow Islamic doctrine, they are no longer a Muslim, but are a kafir (non-Muslim).

Now, how do we know if a Muslim is good or bad? If they are following the Koran and the Sunna (the perfect example of Mohammed), they are a good Muslim. If they don’t follow the doctrine, then they are not a Muslim. That means that from the stand point of Islam there is no such thing as a good or bad Muslim. You either are a Muslim or you are not. When anyone follows the Koran and the Sunna, they are Muslim. When anyone does not follow the doctrine of Islam then they are a kafir.

This means that a person called a Muslim has two modes of being-Muslim and kafir, or kafir-Muslim. The same person can be a Muslim in one moment and a kafir in the next.

What do kafirs mean by a good Muslim? Simple, the same way we judge all other people as good and bad-the Golden Rule. Do they follow the Golden Rule when they are with us? If so, then they are a good person.

Since the Koran and the Sunna do not have the Golden Rule, how are Muslims to treat us? Islamic doctrine lays out an alternative to the Golden Rule. Those who do not believe Mohammed are kafirs, and kafirs are treated differently from Muslims.

Islamic doctrine says a great deal about the kafir. Most of the Koran is about kafirs, 61%, only 39% is about Muslims. About 20% of the Hadith is about kafirs and 98% of the Sira is about kafirs. Mohammed was fixated on kafirs and annihilated every kafir by violence, exile or conversion. When Mohammed died, there was not a person alive in Arabia who would argue with him.

Mohammed’s actions are pure Islam; therefore, annihilating kafirs and kafir culture is pure Islam. A Muslim has to be, in some way, in some form of action, eliminating kafirs and their world. The action against kafirs is jihad. There are four flavors of jihad and murder is only one. Deception, conversation, articles and TV appearances can be jihad of speech and writing. There is always the option of giving to an Islamic charity, since one of the Koranic uses of charity is jihad.

Every Muslim believes that all nonbelievers are kafirs. The Koran says that kafirs may be hated, plotted against, deceived, murdered, raped, enslaved, mocked and tortured. All of those actions are Islam and perfect doctrine. When a person is being a good Muslim, they are following Islam and that means that you are a kafir. Hate, deception, murder, mockery and torture are bad for kafirs, but good for Muslims.

Kafirs are pure other. Muslims treat other Muslims as brothers and sisters, but they can treat a kafir well or they can treat them as less than an animal. Islam has dualistic ethics, one set of rules for Muslims and another set of rules for kafirs. Dualism is bad. When a Muslim practices dualism, they are bad. There is no good in Islam for a kafir and therefore, there is no good in a Muslim for a kafir.

Does this mean that the Muslim at work is bad? Yes, when they are following the doctrine of Islam. Whenever they are not following Islam, that person can be as good as any other. It is not about people, but about doctrine. It is the doctrine of Islam to be bad to kafirs. When anyone is practicing Islam around a kafir they must be bad, since Mohammed was never good to kafirs.

Wait! What about the nice, pious Muslim at work? He is good, isn’t he?

Is he nice because of the Golden Rule or is he practicing the Sunna of the charming Mohammed we find in the early Meccan days? Mohammed could be very polite with kafirs, however, if charm did not work, then other methods were used. Islam is a process of increasing force that can start out pleasantly.

We are left with an ethical confusion around any Muslim. They can seem pleasant, but nothing changes the fact that they see Mohammed as the perfect person to imitate. Nothing changes the fact that we are kafirs. Kafir is the worst word in the human language.

Who are we to believe-the Muslim at work or Mohammed? Every Muslim wants to imitate Mohammed; every Muslim is a Mohammedan. The problem is that Mohammed annihilated every kafir he ever met. It was a process. The process started out nice and when nice did not work, it ended in annihilation of the kafir. In Islam, nice is the beginning of bad for the kafir.

So how do you tell if a nice Muslim is good or bad? From the kafir point-of-view, there is only the fact that a Muslim is following Mohammed’s example. And that is bad, very bad.

Bill Warner

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

When you study the incident of Major Hasan at Fort Hood, you realize that there were some questions that needed to have been asked. But, no one knew what to ask, since the wrong questions might seem, well, politically incorrect. No one wants to be politically incorrect. We don’t want to offend.

If you look around you will find that no one is asking any Muslims hard questions. Never mind the Major Hasan types, no one asks questions to the Muslim at work. It turns out that there are many questions that each and every Muslim should be asked. These are simple ones that deal with the core of Islam. Every Muslim knows the answers.

“Do you believe that the Koran is perfect?” This is not offensive. Muslims must believe that the Koran is perfect, without error. They also believe that it is eternal and universal. Most of all, it came from the lips of Mohammed.

“Is Mohammed the ideal Muslim? Should Muslims pattern their life after Mohammed?” Again, don’t worry that Muslims will find this awkward. Mohammed is admired, looked up to, and idealized. He is the perfect father, husband, friend, warrior, wise elder and best companion that could be.

These questions establish the Islam of the believer. Every Muslim believes that the Koran is perfect, and Mohammed is the ideal human.
Islam is only partially based on the Koran. Far more of a Muslim’s life is governed by Mohammed than the Koran and Allah. Why is this so important? The practical way to understand Islam and what Muslims believe and think is to know about Mohammed. This is very good news. Anyone can understand Mohammed’s life.

However, once you get to know Mohammed, the perfect Muslim, Islam becomes problematic. From the first days of being a prophet Mohammed not only preached a better way of life, but he attacked all those who did not believe him. He created a new type of human being called the kafir, usually called unbeliever, but this is not an accurate translation. A kafir is the worst person in the world; an unbeliever is just someone who does not believe. A kafir can be mocked, deceived, tortured, enslaved, murdered, robbed, raped, and plotted against. Kafir is the worst word in the human language.

Now we are ready to ask a Muslim another question. “Am I a kafir?”

The only answer is yes, but that is not the answer you will get. If you are a Christian you will be told no, you are a person of the Book. That sounds nice, but if you don’t believe that both Jesus and Mohammed were the prophets of Allah and that the Gospels are false, then you are a Christian kafir. They also might say that you are a non-Muslim, but that is not what the Koran says. The Koran says that you are a kafir.

Now we come to more questions that should be asked, but most people do not have the knowledge to ask them, since the questions are based on knowing Mohammed’s life. As an example, Mohammed repeatedly advised Muslims to deceive kafirs if it would advance Islam. So: “Have you ever deceived a kafir?” is appropriate to ask.

Mohammed assassinated kafirs, tortured, enslaved, robbed and plotted against them. His entire life as a prophet was an attempt to make kafirs submit to Islam by any means possible. It is proper then to ask: “How do you feel about what he did?”

If you are a Christian, ask: “Over 60 million Christians have been killed in jihad. Christians are persecuted daily in Islamic lands. Have you ever apologized for this?”

If you are a black American, ask: “Islam sold slaves on the West coast of Africa, the east coast of Africa and the Mediterranean. You enslaved over a million Europeans. Why do you never take any responsibility for slavery?”

If you are a Jew, ask: “How do you see the war against Israel as jihad?”

The other reason we do not ask questions is that we have become a nation of deceivers under political correctness. We don’t ask Muslims any question that would make them feel “uncomfortable”.

It is completely reasonable to ask anyone about their ideology. Christians, Jews, liberals, conservatives and every other ideology have to answer questions about what they believe. Why not Muslims?

That is the true question for kafirs: “Why are Muslims the only people in the world who don’t have to be asked difficult questions about what they believe?”

All Muslims must answer questions about Islam, questions about Mohammed and the Koran for the only way to know a Muslim is to know their Islam.

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

There is a very big problem that goes beyond the dead and wounded at Fort Hood. The jihadist “broke” his oath of service, but what was the oath worth before he started killing kafirs, unbelievers? Major Hasan swore:

I, Nidal Hasan, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.

The value of an oath is determined by someone’s ethics. So, what are Islamic ethics? Like all aspects of Islam, its ethics are found in the Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and the Hadith (his traditions). The Golden Rule is not in these texts. Instead, Islam has dualistic ethics, one set of rules for Muslims and one set for kafirs (non-Muslims). This means that Islam dictates brotherhood between Muslims, but not Muslims and kafirs.

The Koran defines kafirs. The word “unbeliever” does not remotely carry the meaning of kafir. A kafir is less than human. The word “kafir” is the worst word in the human language. Kafirs can be hated, assassinated, deceived, enslaved, robbed, plotted against, raped, tortured, mocked and demeaned in every way.

Mohammed repeatedly advised Muslims to deceive the kafir in order to advance Islam. Deceiving kafirs is Sunna, in the way of Mohammed, the perfect Muslim. A Muslim is to tell the truth to another brother Muslim, but, if it will advance Islam, they can deceive the kafir. Does this mean that a Muslim deceives kafirs all the time? Of course not, but if it advances Islam, deception is ethical.

Mohammed said: war is deception. Who is the war with? Kafirs are the only enemy of Islam. Mohammed was at a state of permanent war with them. During the last 9 years of his life, he launched and led a violent event on the average of every 6 weeks. He employed deception against the kafirs again and again. Deception is Sunna.

Jihad against the kafir is Sunna. Jihad is also successful. In brief: Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years in Mecca. He was driven out of Mecca and went to Medina. In Medina he became a politician and a warrior. Islam then grew from a religion to a political force, and Mohammed died without an enemy left standing. Jihad brought him total success.

Jihad can be any action or word that brings pressure against the kafir. Jihad is by the sword, pen, speech and money. A jihadist does not have to kill kafirs. This means that deception, jihad, can be practiced in many areas to advance Islam. For instance, a Muslim translator or FBI agent can “shade” their work to conceal facts from the kafirs. And what if a Muslim in his role of translator or agent is caught concealing or deceiving, what will our leaders do? Nothing. Why? There is no one in leadership capacity that knows the doctrine and history of political Islam that has shown any knowledge to the public. Our leaders are willfully ignorant about Islam.

The question is: what is the worth of an oath of office from anyone who practices deception when it advances his agenda?

Let us look further at his oath: “all enemies, foreign or domestic”. Major Hasan is a Muslim and a Muslim is a brother to all other Muslims and an enemy of the kafir. Why would any Muslim defend America from an Islamic threat? His true allegiance forbids this. Muslims owe their alliance to the umma, the Muslim community, not to a kafir nation.

Why would Hasan protect the Constitution? The Bill of Rights offers all peoples freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Islamic law, Sharia law, denies these rights to any human. An apostate of Islam can be killed and freedom of speech is specifically denied. For instance, Mohammed or the Koran may not be criticized.

Major Hasan, as a Muslim, is not a friend of any kafir soldier since there are 14 verses in the Koran that command a Muslim not to be a friend of a kafir. As a Muslim, he does not protect the Constitution, swore a meaningless oath, believes that his fellow soldiers are kafirs (less than human), serves the umma before our civilization and deceives kafirs when it advances Islam. He also believes that jihad, in all of its forms, is the true relationship between Muslims and kafirs.

So far we have only examined the military side of Islamic service, but this applies to FBI, police, Homeland Security, fire department, any other government service and citizenship. The doctrine of Islam makes a Muslim’s oath meaningless when made to kafirs.

Houston, we have a problem.

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

Ancient religious texts like the Koran contain outdated ethical concepts. The Old Testament has brutal laws and violent passages. As a result Christians and Jews don’t follow them. Muslims are the same as Christians and Jews; they pick what works and reject what doesn’t work. Why should Islam be considered any worse than other religion or cult?

The short answer is that Islam is not similar to anything else, including religions such as Christianity. As far as the Koran having any outdated ethical concepts, that is impossible. According to Islamic doctrine, the Koran is perfect, eternal and universal. It does not contain the slightest error since contains the exact words of Allah. Hence, it can never be outdated.

Also, the Koran is a derivative book. Every idea in the Koran, with two exceptions, can be traced to earlier works. The two novel ideas in the Koran are that Mohammed is the last prophet of god and that violent force, jihad, can be used to harm those who don’t agree with Mohammed. Violence against kafirs is systemic in all of Islam’s texts and forms a central theme.

Yes, the Old Testament has violence, but there is no real parallel to the Koran and Islam. Look at the numbers. The violence in the Old Testament is limited to a few verses. The violence in the Koran against the kafir (unbeliever) takes up 61% of the text. Every mention of the kafir is brutal, condemning, pejorative, hateful and threatening. The Hadith, the Traditions of Mohammed, has 20% of its text devoted to jihad. The Sira, Mohammed’s life, has 70% of the text about Mohammed as prophet devoted to jihad.

These numbers show that the analogy between the violence in the texts of the Jews and Christians is vastly overdrawn.

The next suggested parallel between Islam and Christians is that both pick and choose from their texts. Every Muslim believes that the Koran is perfect down to the last letter. It does not have a single error. This makes it very difficult to ignore.

But a Muslim does have a way to make choices that a Christian, Jew, Buddhist or Hindu cannot. Islam has dualistic ethics. Muslims are all brothers and to be treated as such. But there is no Golden Rule and a Muslim may choose to treat the kafir badly or well, depending upon the situation and needs. That is the nature of dualistic ethics.

Dualism also allows the choice of the Meccan Koran or the Medinan Koran. When Mohammed was in Mecca, he was weak and attempted to get along with the Meccans. This gives us the verses of tolerance. Later, in Medina Mohammed had power and the Koran became cruel and vicious towards any person who denied Mohammed. So every Muslim has the choice of tolerance and coexistence from the Meccan verses, or any of the physical violence or hatred found in the Medinan Koran.

There is another choice that a person who claims to be a Muslim can make. They may choose to be a kafir by ignoring an Islamic doctrinal point. It is very odd, but people assume that every action by one who calls them a Muslim is pure Islam. But the Koran condemns Muslims who make choices to imitate kafirs. This condemnation extends to those who choose to apply the Golden Rule to kafirs.
So there are three kinds of Muslim, depending on their choices: Meccan Muslim, Medinan Muslim and kafir Muslim.

There is a great danger in trying to understand Islam through Christianity or any other Western idea or concept. The underlying assumption is that Islam is similar or has parallels to kafir culture. This means that Islam does not need to be studied, because it is “like” some kafir concept or institution such as freedom and Christianity. This idea is false and has no supporting facts to prove it. Islam is sui generis, unique, and without parallel.

Islam stands entirely on its own with a separate logic, reasoning and ethical system. Islam must be studied on its own. In the end this means understanding the themes of the Koran and the life of Mohammed found in the Sira and the Hadith.

Why is Islam worse than any other religion or cult? Simple, it is not a religion, but a complete civilization that has a political doctrine of annihilating and subjugating all kafir civilizations. This doctrine had been put into action for the last 1400 years and has caused the deaths of 270 million kafirs.

Islam has annihilated entire civilizations. Take Afghanistan as an example. Before, Islam invaded the civilization of Gandharva, it had been peaceful for four centuries and was wealthy. Buddhism flourished and great art was produced. Then came Islamic jihad and Ghandarva was destroyed down to the last work of art and the last Buddhist. Today we have the armpit of the world-Afghanistan, an Islamic nation based upon Sharia law and Islamic politics. Buddhism and Gandharvan culture have been totally destroyed.

The political theory of Islam and its results correlate 100%. Of course, there are some harmful and creepy cults, but, measured by results, they are not in the same league as political Islam. Islam is the ultimate civilizational predator and should receive most of the attention.

Today we have two choices in viewing Islam. We can see it as based upon its doctrine and history or we can choose to see it on the basis of multiculturalism-all cultures are equally valid. But Islam denies that all cultures are equally valid. Islam insists that it is superior all other cultures. All cultures are not equally valid and all other cultures must submit. It is the will of Allah, and it is Sunna (the way of Mohammed). What is odd is that tolerant multiculturalists defend the Islamic monoculture so much.

This means that we also have two other choices. Will kafirs ignore the threat of total destruction or go on pretending that Islam is similar to other cultures? Will we foolishly apply the Golden Rule to a civilization based on dualism and hope to create an Islam that respects kafirs and treats them well? But Allah hates kafirs and it is Sunna to immigrate, deceive and make the kafirs submit little by little.

Choices: will we choose life or death for kafir civilization?

Bill Warner, CSPI

Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America