The reason for this is that in the Koran, jihad is prescriptive and Mohammed, the perfect example for every Muslim, was  a prophet but also a warlord.


An Interview with Shillman Fellow Raymond Ibrahim.


Reprinted from Linformale.eu.

Of Egyptian Coptic parents and fluent in Arabic, Raymond Ibrahim is among those scholars and commentators who, like Robert Spencer and David Horowitz, is not afraid of calling a spade a spade. In this times of ours poisoned by politically correctness it comes like a breath of fresh air.

He will not talk of Islam as “the religion of peace” pretending that it is something that it never was. On the contrary, he will emphasize that contemporary jihadists just follow a strict application of the Koran, much alike the Protestant Reformers with their concept of sola scriptura (scripture by itself). The main difference is that the latter usually do not make themselves explode, or behead “infidels” or are committed to a permanent strife with the West to subjugate it.

The reason for this is that in the Koran, jihad is prescriptive and Mohammed, the perfect example for every Muslim, was  a prophet but also a warlord.

A regular contributor to the David Horowitz Freedom Center and previously associate director of The Middle East Forum, Raymond Ibrahim is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians and editor of the seminal The Al Qaeda Reader: The Essential Texts of Osama Bin Laden’s Terrorist Organization.

He has kindly accepted to answer our questions.

The first issue I would like to address is the widespread notion that ISIS is the facto a product of the U.S.A intervention in Iraq. The implication is very clear. If the U.S.A wouldn’t have invaded Iraq there would be no ISIS around. How would you comment on this?

Facts are facts.  Before the US invaded, Saddam Hussein was renowned for suppressing Islamist movements.  Indeed, one of the reasons for his later human rights abusing reputation was that he was brutally stomping out the jihadis, a label Western media regular omit when talking about secular Arab dictators using brutal means, such as Assad and his efforts against jihadis.  A decade after Saddam was ousted, killed, and the U.S. proclaimed victory for having brought “freedom and democracy” to Iraq, all we have to show is the emergence of ISIS, which, when it comes to human rights abuses, makes Saddam look like Santa Claus.

I usually look to the situation of Christian minorities in Muslim countries to understand the nature of those who rule.  Under Saddam, they and their churches were protected; the year America brought “freedom and democracy” to Iraq, Christians were savagely persecuted and dozens of their churches bombed.   Incidentally, it’s not just in Iraq that American intervention gave rise to ISIS.  Libya and Syria are also part of ISIS’ caliphate, again, thanks to the U.S. paving the way by ousting Gaddafi and trying to oust Assad.  I don’t claim to know the reason behind this phenomenon, but the facts speak for themselves: where the U.S. ousts secular Arab strongmen—whose human rights abuses were often in the context of fighting even worse human rights abusing jihadis—ISIS follows.

More here.


Post-Hijra Islam

VIDEO: “Nothing to Do with Islam”?


Medication is the only remedy and detox…….

Medicine for Islam

Islam is like ‘gangrene’ and wearing burka is ‘serious crime’, says presidential candidate

FRENCH presidential candidate Bruno Le Maire has launched a scathing attack on political Islam and vowed to put an end to its influence on the country.


Bruno Le Maire and a QoranGETTY

The presidential hopeful attacked Islam and called for socialist voters

The Republican and former agriculture minister, has called on all “disillusioned Socialists” to vote for him in the first and most decisive round of the French elections, which will be held on November 20 and 27.

Mr Le Maire, 47, who is known for his strong anti-immigration stance, told French magazine Le Journal du Dimanche political Islam had been gnawing away at France’s secular values for years; and Islamic institutions were being run from afar by powerful religious leaders based in more radical Muslim nations, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

He said: “Political Islam is like gangrene. It’s an infection which has caused France’s liberal traditions to slowly rot away.

More here.


It’s like I’ve been saying all along, Islam/Muslims have the benefit of hindsight/historical record, knowing exactly what the reformation of the Catholic Church and Enlightenment leads to, and will reject it for Islam time and again.

NOTE: To date, no one has been able to offer an adequate dissenting view to that statement.

Video bio: We cover political correctness, forbidden knowledge in academia, Islam (including immigration and reform), and the current US presidential election among other issues.

H/T: Brian of London

NOTE: Majjid Nawaz’s argument for reformed Islam is reduced to rubble



quran quran


That’s the “M.O.” of the followers Mo….

Then the woman apologizes for the wording (not the content) and says all relifgions are private, which is false, Islam is a very public square ideology. Daniel Greenfield reminds us that since Islamic female garb is there to distinguish followers of the faith from the rest, so their women folk do not get molested, it no longer can be deeemed a private issue.

Woman who mocked burka goes into hiding after Muslim thugs offer bounty for her murder

A JOURNALIST has faced a barrage of chilling rape and death threats after criticising the burka – forcing her to go into hiding.


Lejla ColakSG•GETTY

Journalist Lejla Colak wrote a controversial article mocking the burka

In a controversial article, Lejla Colak said forcing women to wear the Islamic headscarf was like forcing them to strap a sex toy to their heads.

Twisted online trolls have launched a sick hate campaign against the Bosnian reporter, offering a cash prize if anyone kills or rapes her.

One social media user wrote “Are there any volunteers to rape lovely Lejla? I will personally pay for it” while others called for her to be burnt alive.

To wear a burka is the same as wearing a dildo in public

Lejla Colak

In her article, Colak wrote: “To wear a burka, niqab or any other religious sign or mark on your head is the same as wearing a dildo in public.

“Imagine walking around with a giant dildo and traumatising people.

“Religion is supposed to represent something that is extremely personal just like an individual sexuality.”


The Bosnian reporter has been forced into hiding following the abuse

Ms Colak has since apologised for the wording of the article.

She said: “I can apologise for the form but not for the content. Yes, religion – all of them – should be a private matter.

“Everything I have said I mean. Forgive me only for that piece of plastic with which I have hurt the feelings of the public.

More here. H/T: Tommy Robinson


Never trust the mediocre media to handle serious issues, you’ll always be left uninformed and disappointed.

Screw the entire debate about wearing islamonazi gear, entirely irrelevant when the country is being flooded with people who will eventually overturn newly enacted laws restricting their garments.

Also, I would advise people debating Islamonazis in public to remind the audience about what’s really in question, Islamic supremacy by adherents to an ideology that has 1.6 (their often quoted figures) members, which has at it’s core belief the ideal of manifest destiny.

These clothes imposed upon women/indoctrinated into wearing them are signs of that supremacy, the sharia, which is against all non-muslims, who are to be subjugated (the reason behind jihad) then given three choices, convert, submit as a dhimmi or die. Islamogarb is an outward sign that Islam has arrived, we are here to compete in th epiblic square and eventually take it over, there is no co-existence with us, but eventual surrender and subjugation, no matter how long that takes.

NOTE: Lauren Booth is an islamonazi Jew hater, inviting her onto any program was the first mistake if the intention was not to do a hostile interview with her.

‘Why do you think you should dress this way?’ This Morning burkini debate gets personal as James Whale grills Cherie Blair’s Muslim convert sister Lauren over wearing a hijab

Lauren and DJ James Whale, centre, both agreed that the burkini, modelled right, was not offensive and women should not be told what they should wear on the beach

Lauren and DJ James Whale, centre, both agreed that the burkini, modelled right, was not offensive and women should not be told what they should wear on the beach

  • Lauren Booth converted to Islam in 2010
  • Sister of Cherie Blair joined debate on France’s burkini ban
  • Appeared on This Morning wearing a bright pink hijab 
  • Said it was every woman’s personal choice what to wear
  • James Whale said he was ‘fascinated’ by her choice of religious clothing 

Lauren Booth appeared on today’s This Morning to speak out against France’s controversial ban of burkini on its beaches and explain why she has chosen to embrace wearing religious clothing.

The sister of former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s wife Cherie, who converted to Islam in 2010 following the breakdown of her first marriage, said wearing a burkini or burka is a ‘personal choice’ and women shouldn’t all be forced to dress the same.

Wearing a bright pink headscarf on the ITV show, Lauren, 49, told presenters James Martin and Anita Rani: ‘We don’t have to feel the same and dress the same to get along. There is beauty in diversity.’

Read more:


Because post-hijra Islam corrupts…….

quran quran

That would mean every single one of them……….


Muslim prisoners to be removed from communal prayers for spreading anti-British values

  • Joe Watts Political Editor

Prison governors will be told to remove Muslims from communal prayer in jails if they are deemed to be spreading ‘anti-British’ values.

The proposals will also see Muslim chaplains who offer guidance to a growing number of Islamic prisoners undergoing “tightened vetting” before being allowed near inmates.

The new measures aimed at clamping down on the spread of extremism come as the number of Muslims in British prisons has soared over the last ten years.

It was also confirmed that governors will seek to isolate extremists acting as “self-styled emirs” to prevent them radicalising others.

The counter-extremism scheme comes after Anjem Choudary, one of Britain’s most prominent Islamist clerics, was convicted of crimes that could see him face years in jail.

New Justice Secretary Liz Truss said the measures were needed in order to stop the “spread of this poisonous ideology behind bars”, but critics questioned whether they were appropriate.

Official figures show there are now more than 12,600 Muslims in prison in England and Wales, while the figure was just 8,200 a decade earlier.

More here.


That’s how far the Catholic Church has sunk, that members now have to debate the incoherent mutterings of a marxist pontiff (on Islam) that depart from hundreds of years of stated policy.

APTOPIX Italy Pope Epiphany

NOTE: Msgr.Swetland’s attempted ”gotcha” strategy falls flat, there is no imperative from on high to admit the ridiculous notion that islam is peaceful. Pure bunk. The weasel is easily debunked and all he’s reduced to is repeating claims already debunked by Spencer. Kick this guy out of the church.

Swetland v. Spencer: Is Islam a “Religion of Peace” – a hot debate

The other day Catholic radio show host Drew Mariani had a (too short) debate about the claim that Islam is a “Religion of Peace” between Robert Spencer (an Eastern Catholic who has written extensively on Islam and who directs Jihad Watch) and Msgr. Stuart Swetland.  You can hear this archived HERE.  Listen and take note their different tones as they make their points.

Swetland argues that Catholics must accept that the magisterium requires Catholics to accept that Islam is a “Religion of Peace”.  Spencer argues that the sacred texts of Islam state that Islam is not a Religion of Peace.

After the radio discussion, Swetland issued a longish statement (he says that Spencer is a dissenter from the magisterium).  Spencer responded with his own statement.  (Links also below)

Then, over at Crisis (which I admire each day as a great resource) we see a response to Msgr. Swetland by William Kilpatrick.

Must Catholics Believe that Islam Is Peaceful?

The Apostles’ Creed (updated version):

I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of Saints, the forgiveness of sins, and the peaceful nature of Islam. Amen.

More here.


Islam expert Professor Bill Warner has spoken on this subject before, here is another well written piece on the subject.

Islam and the Decalogue

Persian painting of Muhammad’s vision (artist unknown), c. 1320

I first noticed something unusual about Islam during the 1980s when I was doing research for my book, Ethics in Context. I devoted one section of the book to the “Golden Rule.” The Golden Rule, in its negative or positive formulations, is incorporated not only in Christianity (Matt. 7:12), where Jesus declares it is a summary of “the law and the prophets,” but also in other major religions. For example, in Judaism, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor”; in Hinduism, “Let no man do to another that which would be repugnant to himself”’; in Buddhism, “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful”; in Confucianism, “What you do not want done to yourself, do not do unto others.”

I took this as evidence of the relative universality of rational ethical principles in the world. But in Islam, I could find nothing of the sort, rather just the opposite – a reverse Golden Rule, so to speak: “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. Be merciful to one another, but ruthless to the unbelievers” (Qur’an 48:29); “Never take unbelievers for friends” (3:28). Furthermore, the commands in the Qur’an to slay the unbelievers wherever they find them (2:191), not befriend them (3:28), fight them and show them harshness (9:123), and smite their heads (47:4) – accentuate distance from the Golden Rule.

So I decided at that time just to omit any reference to Islam in that chapter. As I have discovered in further researches, however, the ethical/religious problems within Islam are even more serious. Just as Islam teaches the reverse of the Golden Rule, it teaches the reverse of the last seven of the Ten Commandments, which have to do with morality:

  • 4 th Commandment, Honoring Father and Mother: Al-Azhar University, the most respected authority in Sunni Islam states that retaliation is generally required for murder, but not subject to retaliation is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” Honor killings can go in the other direction, too. Boys captured by ISIS report that they were ordered to kill their parents, according to injunctions in the Qur’an – Suras 9:23, 58:22, 60:4, which mandate complete hatred of, and disassociation from unbelievers, even if they are kindred or parents.
  • 5th Commandment, no killing: Muhammad is considered by Muslims to be the“perfect man”, and offered numerous examples of murder for devout Muslims to follow – beginning with the murder of poets who ridiculed him in Medina and Mecca, and ending with beheading of hundreds of “unbelievers” in his various raids and battles. Osama bin Laden, in his 1996 “Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places,” justified his Fatwa to kill Americans by quoting Quranic verses 3:145, 47:4-6, 2:154, 9:14, 8:72, and 9:5 (the “verse of the sword”). Terrorism is specifically supported in verses 8:12, and 3:151, and a hadith of Bukhari 52:256. And conversion from Islam to another religion is punishable by execution, according to Bukhari 9.84.57, “[Muhammad ordered] ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him’.”

More here. H/T: 


All of what he says ( historically) is true, but none of the prior mentioned had a mandate to murder from a deity.

mo tunic 29.12.2011

History does not suggest when this current wave of terrorism will end. It does suggest that it will end some day, and that it can be ameliorated, if not entirely stopped.


The Terrorist Past Has a Message for the Terrorist Present

History suggests that Europe’s current wave of terror can be ameliorated, if not entirely stopped.

Since July 18, Germany has seen at least three smaller-scale attacks: A Pakistani refugee injured five people with an ax on a train; an Iranian-German teenager shot nine people dead in Munich; a Syrian refugee tried to set off a bomb at a concert in Ansbach, killing himself. Belgium, meanwhile, was struck by suicide bombers on March 22 who killed 32 people.

It is certainly understandable if fear and panic now grip the Continent. But it’s important to remember that this is hardly the first wave of terrorism that Europe has seen—and so far not the worst.

The first wave was the work of anarchists who struck across Europe and the Americas from the 1880s to the 1920s. In the worst of these attacks, a horse-drawn wagon filled with explosives killed 38 on Wall Street in New York in 1920. The next-worst attack occurred when an anarchist flung two bombs into a crowded opera house in Barcelona in 1893, killing 22 people. Between 1892 and 1894, Paris saw 11 bombings, which killed nine people.

But the anarchists’ true calling card was assassinating heads of state. They murdered the president of France, the prime minister of Spain, the empress of Austria-Hungary, the king of Italy—and President William McKinley. In addition, a band of nihilists killed Tsar Alexander II of Russia. No terrorist group before or since has assassinated so many leaders.

More here .


clapping orson

“And they (liberals) applaud that but if you say something about a woman being forced to wear a beekeeper suit in the hot sun all day…”

Dawkins then took over saying: “But that’s ‘their culture’ and you have to accept it. It’s the one exception. Liberal about everything but this one exception, ‘it’s their culture’.

“Well, to hell with their culture.”

Dawkins went on to say Islam had a “free pass”  because of the “terror of being thought racist” if the religion is criticised.

‘To hell with their culture’ – Richard Dawkins in extraordinary blast at Muslims

TOP academic and atheist Richard Dawkins has attacked western society’s relaxed attitude to radical Islam in an extraordinary outburst.

Dawkins has been criticised for the comment aimed at Muslims

The British scientist was appearing on a live TV chat show in the United States when he blasted “to hell with their culture” when referring to some practices in Islam, such as women being made to wear burkhas.

Dawkins was appearing on the Bill Maher’s HBO show and the pair were debating regressive liberals and, in particular, universities banning those with extreme views from giving lectures.

The conversation turned to Islam when Dawkins criticised those afraid to confront the religion on some of its extreme practices, saying the religion was being given a “free pass”.

The 74-year-old said: “There’s this notion Islam and Muslims are this protected species.

“That if we talk about them at all or criticise at all, it’s somehow hurting or humiliating Muslims. It’s a ridiculous idea.”

Host Maher then added liberals should protect those who are being repressed regardless of who it offends.

He went on to say this includes women forced to wear religious clothing, which led to Dawkins extraordinary comment.

Maher said: “We’re on the side of the women’s movement and poor and minorities and whatever. Gay people, the disabled, the abused, whatever Caitlyn (Jenner) is up to. We’re all for it.

More here. H/T: Tommy Robinson


He shouted allah akbar before being shot….

Doesn’t matter how infidel the muslim, according to Islam, waging jihad and dying in the action delivers his soul to allah. The 9/11 terrorist islamonazis drank booze and whored around before their last act of jihad.

It’s why those who deal out capital punishment to homosexuals and other offenders of Islamic law believe they’re being ”compassionate”, the ending of one’s own life in blood absolves the offender of his sins. The media will hype the ”non-Islamic” nature of this bastard to show that this wasn’t an act of jihad….when the facts speak other wise.

EXCLUSIVE – ‘He drank alcohol, ate pork and took drugs. He was NOT a Muslim – he was a s***’: Truck terrorist’s cousin reveals he is an ‘unlikely jihadist’ who beat his wife and NEVER went to the mosque

  • Truck terrorist who murdered 84 people in a horrific drive along the Nice seafront drank alcohol, ate pork and took drugs – all banned by Islam
  • A cousin of his estranged wife said ‘he was not a Muslim, he was a s***’
  • Revealed he didn’t go to the mosque and didn’t pray or observe Ramadan 
  • The couple had separated after reports of domestic abuse two years ago
  • Detectives raided the family home in Nice and took his wife into protective custody

Truck terrorist Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel was an ‘unlikely jihadist’ who flouted every rule of Islam, his cousin told MailOnline today.

The 31-year-old – who wreaked terror on the Nice seafront as he turned an evening celebrating Bastille Day into a night of terror in which he murdered 84 innocent people – drank alcohol, ate pork and took drugs.

He never prayed or attended a mosque, and hit his wife – with whom he had three children aged five, three and 18 months – and was in the process of getting a divorce.

Monster: Truck terrorist Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel who murdered 84 on Bastille Day in Nice, was described by a cousin as a 's***' and a 'nasty piece of work' who never observed the rules of Islam

Monster: Truck terrorist Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel who murdered 84 on Bastille Day in Nice, was described by a cousin as a ‘s***’ and a ‘nasty piece of work’ who never observed the rules of Islam

Read more: