SECULARIST Ibn Warraq explains that the reason he wrote Why I am not a Muslim, is “first and foremost an assertion of my right to criticize everything and anything in Islam-even to make errors, and to satirize. “Muslims and non-Muslims have the right to critically examine the sources, the history, and dogma of Islam.” Are the historic truths and origins of Islam concealed because of an unholy silence? To go against the dominant thinking of your friends, is perhaps the most difficult act you can perform. The opposite for courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.
Ibn Warraq’s book is helpful and in some respects a ground-breaking effort to provide a critical perspective on a faith that is often regarded as uncritical, and regressive. It is part-for-whole a late twentieth-century account of the emergence of religious culture, the thirst of knowledge, and scrutiny of Islamic resurgence. If we fail to exercise a certain amount of skepticism in investigating the postmodern view of Islam, it may be due to political and religious correctness that have blunted the critical faculties. The overall activity of rethinking and interpreting Islam has rapidly become divergent through sociological determinism and theological relativism.
There are traditionalist and neo-traditionalist, revivalist and neo-revivalist, modernist and liberal contextual approaches to understanding and interpreting Islam as a faith and culture. However, since 9/11 the momentum to elevate Islam to be accepted as a ‘religion of peace’ or one that is “grossly misunderstood” has transited writers, journalists, leaders, and critics to a place where it gravitates to swerve of actualities. The relentless media and academic hostility and rage directed toward Christianity, Judaism, and on any religion except for Islam is truly an amazing spectacle.
“Turnspeak” is a term where you attack someone and then turn it around 180 degrees and claim they attacked you. Because the truth is the exact opposite of the information being disseminated it is psychologically difficult to counter and leads to confusion, a feeling of being “burned-out” or “overwhelmed” creating a blanket of “white noise” which makes clarity difficult to achieve. The mask of such ideology is the means through which Islamic propaganda and myths are spread. The mask makes vice seem beautiful, turns squalor and nastiness into glamorous thrill, seduces the onlooker into the game – and leaves him or her with the corpse on his hands.
The term was first used by journalists to describe German propaganda after it invaded Czechoslovakia in March of 1939. To win sympathy for their invasion, the Germans practiced what has become known as “turnspeak”. They turned the blame back on the Czechs for trying to precipitate an all-out war in the region. In other words, the Czechs in their attempt to hang onto their land were ready to plunge all of Europe into war. During World War II, Haj Amin al-Hussein was appointed as fuhrer of Hitler and called for an intifada against Britain.
Haj Amin al-Husseini was the Grand mufti of Jerusalem, as well as Yasser Arafat’s close relative and mentor. Iraq sided with Germany during World War II and in May 1941 and Haj Amin al-Husseini issued a fatwa, or summons to a holy war against Jews. His proclamation against Britain was declared in Iraq, and was instrumental in his 1941 pro-Nazi intifada in Iraqi and request of Arab-Americans not to support FDR. Saddam Hussein was raised in the house of his uncle Khayrallah Tulfah, who was a leader in the Mufti’s pro-Nazi coup in Iraq in May 1941.
Both Yasser Arafat and Saddam Hussein were greatly influenced by the Mufti during their time in Cairo during the 1950s. (Joan Peters, From Time Immemorial: The Origins of the Arab-Jewish Conflict over Palestine, Chicago, IL: JKAP Publications, 2000, page 72). Theological turnspeak has subtly infiltrated mainstream Christianity and academia in equilibrium, and just like media turnspeak it portrays the victim as aggressor and the aggressor as victim. Turnspeak, whether as political, theological or ideological, conditions and invariably shapes the worldview of the masses.
Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of slain infidels, the enslavement of the populations, the booty in captives, cattle and movable goods, the cities, destroyed, razed or spared and taken by treaty, and the countryside pillaged or set on fire. Christian sources (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav) in particular, independently validate this narrative, and complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering of the non-Muslim victims of jihad wars. (Bat Ye’or, “The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam” Documents Part I.1: Jihad, The Era of Conquests, Seventh to Eleventh Century, Pages. 271-292). All four classical schools of Islamic jurisprudence iterated such “rules” across the vast Muslim empire.
The West is suffering a serious cultural crisis and ‘watchmen’ (leaders with insight), should make a decisive contribution to heal such distress by reconnecting its empirical analyses or value judgment with its disparaged Judeo-Christian roots. “The notion whereby there are no good reasons for judging cultures or civilizations or belief systems is known as relativism. Today this goes by several different names: “post-Enlightenment thinking”, “post-modern thinking “, “weak thinking”, “thinking without foundations”, “thinking without truth”, and “deconstructivism”.( Charles E. Winquist, Epiphanies of Darkness: Deconstruction in Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986, page 117).
“Muslims avail themselves of the right to criticize in their frequent denunciations of Western culture, in terms that would have been deemed racist, neocolonialist, or imperialist had a European directed them against Islam. “Without criticism, Islam will remain unassailed in its dogmatic, fanatical, medieval fortress; ossified in its totalitarian, intolerant, paranoid past. It will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality, originality, and truth.” – (“Why I am Not a Muslim” p.14). Islam is fundamentalist by nature, and not by some peculiar and aberrant recent development.
All Muslims, not just the fanatics, believe that every word of the Quran is quite literally the word of God, absolutely and unquestionably true for all times, places, and people, and practically the same goes for the Hadith and the Sharia. Anyone who wishes to argue that the fanatics’ interpretation of these elements is wrong and that a far more `liberal’ interpretation can be made and that that is the real Islam, have really only their own tastes and inclinations to support them. There is no Pope in Islam, nor any Council with authority to impose a Creed.
The fanatic who thinks that all unbelievers should be killed has just as much authority as the Sufi who thinks that all religions are true and that even atheists go to heaven. Both parties could adduce Quranic texts and Hadith to support their positions, and both would be drawing, in their own minds, upon the immutable word of God. Even if we concede that Muslim conservatives have interpreted the Sharia in their own way, what gives us the right to say that their interpretation is the inauthentic one and that of the liberal Muslims, authentic? Who is going to decide what authentic Islam is?’
With regard to so-called liberal Islam this manifests in the West chiefly in the form of `Sufism or Islamic Mysticism’. This is unfortunate because Sufism has been taken up by many Western intellectuals for whom real Islam is Sufism, and real Sufism is the Sufism of Ibn Arabi. This is in fact a ludicrous position, since it amounts to saying that real Islam is a minority view within a minority view, a view, moreover, that for most of the history of Islam has been suspected of heresy. This is liken to a recent a Malaysian uztaza (female Muslim preacher), tv program host who associated Valentine’s day with Christianity.
According to Ibn Warraq, what is needed with regard to Sufism is an in-depth critique of the metaphysics of Ibn Arabi as expounded in the works of such contemporary scholars as William Chittick and Michel Chodkiewicz, together with a sociological survey of the circus that surrounds such contemporary Sufis as Sheikh Nazim al-Qubrusi. Objective in-depth research is not an option as far as evidence and historical background is concerned.
The myth of Islamic tolerance
The myth of Islamic tolerance is largely invented by Western freethinkers and its influence has spread like a virus globally. Islam was never a religion of tolerance and it is not tolerant by nature. Despite the way the apologists would like to depict it, Islam was spread by the sword and has been maintained by the sword throughout its history. In truth it was the Arab empire that was spread by the sword and it is as an Arab empire that Islam is maintained to this day in the form of a religion largely invented to hold that empire together and subdue native populations. An unmitigated cultural disaster parading as God’s (Allah’s) will.
Religious minorities were always second-class citizens in this empire and were only tolerated on sufferance and in abject deference to their Arab/Muslim masters; for polytheists and unbelievers there was no tolerance at all, it was conversion or death. These repulsive characteristics are written into the Quran, the Hadith and the Sharia, and are an ineradicable feature of the religion. There is no way that Islam can reform itself and remain Islam, no way it can ever be made compatible with pluralism, free speech, critical thought and democracy. Islam is antithetical to democracy or religious autonomy.
Anyone convinced they already possess the truth have no need for such things. Although Muslims resident in non-Muslim countries clamour for every kind of indulgence for their own beliefs and customs, there can be no doubt that given any kind of power they would impose their own beliefs and eliminate all difference. In short, Islam is religious fascism, and it is only a feeble-minded political correctness that prevents it from being recognised as such. One must also examine the non-negotiable claims made by Muslims and for Muslims.
Muslims make various false claims that it made many scientific discoveries. First, that Islam never really encouraged science, if by science we mean `disinterested enquiry’. What Islam always meant by ‘ knowledge’ was religious knowledge, anything else was deemed dangerous to the faith. All the real science that occurred under Islam occurred despite the religion not because of it. Second, how indebted the Muslim world has always been to the West, not only to the Greeks in the beginning, but particularly in modern times in knowledge of its own intellectual and cultural history.
These unpalatable, half realised home truths are manifest in the contemporary Muslim world in the form of a massive resentment and inferiority complex: It is a depressing fact that during the Gulf War almost every single Muslim and Arab intellectual sympathized with Saddam Hussein, because, we are told, `he stood up to the West’. In this explanation is summed up all sense of Islamic failure, and feelings of inferiority vis-a-vis the West. The Muslim world must be in a dire way if it sees hope in a tyrant who has murdered literally thousands of his own countrymen.
“The religion is based on deception; it succeeded through aggression and intimidation; it holds back progress; and it is a “form of totalitarianism.” Surveying nearly fourteen centuries of history, he concludes, “The effects of the teachings of the Qu’ran have been a disaster for human reason and social, intellectual, and moral progress. “-(Ibn Warraq). To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize. In the face of terror and murder, the call for peace is not patriotic, it’s cowardice. There is no security, no safety, in the appeasement of Islam.
Sharia in Europe Today
When you study Islam in Europe today, you are seeing America in 20 years. Why? The actions by Muslims in Europe today are based on Sharia law, the same Sharia law that is beginning to be implemented in America today. There are times when traffic cannot move in London streets as Muslims commandeer the streets to pray – a political result based on Sharia law. Entire areas of Europe are no-go zones for non-Muslims, this includes the police. These are Islamic enclaves where only Muslims live. The policy is based on Sharia.
In England an Anglican bishop calls for the rule of Islamic law for Muslims. The bishop is obeying Sharia law. In the schools only Islamic approved text can be used; this is based on Sharia law. Christians may not speak to Muslims about Christianity nor may Christians hand out literature. Nevertheless, the reverse is validated and institutionalised through dakwah (Islamic missions and prostelyzing) and forced conversions. This is a political result based on Sharia law enforced by british courts. Rape by Muslims is so prevalent in parts of Sweden that Sweden has forbidden the police from collecting any data in the rape investigation that would point to Islam. And the beat goes on…
Rape is part of Islamic Doctrine as applied to non-Muslim women, The Sydney gang rapes were a series of gang rape attacks committed by a group of up to fourteen Lebanese Australian Muslims led by Bilal Skaf against non-Muslim women and teenage girls, as young as 14, in Sydney Australia in 2000. The crimes— described as ethnically motivated hate crimes by officials and commentators— were covered extensively by the news media, and prompted the passing of new laws. The nine men convicted of the gang rapes were sentenced to a total of more than 240 years in jail. According to court transcripts Judge Michael Finnane described the rapes as events “you hear about or read about only in the context of wartime atrocities.”( The Age – When race and rape collide)
In London, mass demonstrations by Muslims call for the end of British law and Sharia law to rule all people, regardless of religion. This political action is based on Sharia. In some English hospitals during Ramadan fast (an Islamic religious event), non-Muslims cannot eat where a Muslim can see them. The submission of non-Muslims to Islamic preferences is based on Shariah law. At British Hospitals, Muslim women are treated only as Shari law demands.
Sharia in America Today
Here are current historical events in America that are driven by Sharia Law: On September 11, 2001 Jihadists attacked and destroyed the World Trade Center in New York. This atrocity was in compliance to the doctrine of jihad found in the Sharia law. The attack was a political action motivated by a religious mandate for endless jihad. Textbooks in America must be approved by Islamic Councils. This is in accordance with Sharia law. American employers and schools are met with demands for time and space to do Islamic prayer. These demands are based on Sharia law.
The American banking system is becoming islamicized with Sharia financing. Their banking system is becoming Sharia compliant in financial law, but is ignorant about the totality of Sharia law. Universities are asked to provide sexually segregated swimming pools and other athletic facilities for Muslim women. Hospitals are being sued for not providing Sharia compliant treatment. No course at the college level uses critical thinking regarding the history and doctrine of Islam. Under Sharia nothing about Islam may be criticized.
Muslim Charities give money to jihadists (Islamic Terrorists), as per Sharia law. Muslim foot-baths are being installed in airport facilities, paid for by American tax dollars. This is in accordance with Sharia law. American prisons are a stronghold of Islamic proselytizing. Work places are being made Islamic worship sites through special rooms and time off to pray. This is in accordance to Sharia law. Islamic refugees bring all of their wives for welfare and medical treatment to America. American authorizes will not act – even when presented with evidence.
Polygamy is pure Sharia. America fought wars in Iraq and Afganistan to implement constitutions whose first article is the supremacy of Sharia law. Why do we need Sharia law? Islamic Scholars claim: Islamic law is perfect, universal and eternal. The laws of the United States are temporary, limited and will pass away. It is the duty of every Muslim to obey the laws of Allah, the Sharia. And it is the a commission for all Muslims to further the cause of Islam through whatever means possible.
Sharia law for the non-Muslim
Laws are man-made; while Sharia law is deemed sacred and comes from the only legitimate God, (Allah.) Sharia: Sharia is based on the principles found in the Quran and other Islamic religious/political texts. There are no common principles between American law and Sharia. Under Sharia law: there is no freedom of religion, no freedom of speech, there is no freedom of thought, there is no freedom of artistic expression, there is no freedom of the press, and there is no equality of peoples – a non-Muslim, a kafir is never equal to a Muslim.
There is no equal protection under Sharia for different classes of people. Justice is dualistic, with one set of laws for Muslim males and different laws for women and non-Muslims. There are no equal rights for women. Women can be beaten. A non-Muslim cannot bear arms. There is no democracy, since democracy means that a non-Muslim is equal to a Muslim. The America constitution would be deemed a man-made document of ignorance, Jahiliyah,that must submit to Sharia. Non-Muslims are dhimmis, third class citizens.
[All governments must be ruled by Sharia law unlike common law], Sharia is not interpretive, nor can it be changed. There is no Golden Rule. The solution: Non-Muslims need to employ an objective fact based approach upon critical thought. When you thoroughly examine the basis of Sharia law, its mandate, implications and ideology, you are compelled to take proactive pivotal steps to safeguard yourself and loved ones against it. The largest part of the Trilogy is not about how to be a good Muslim. Instead most of the text is devoted to the unbeliever.
The Quran devotes 64% of its total words to the unbeliever and the Trilogy, as a whole, devotes 60% of its text to the unbelievers. Islam is not just a religion. It is a complete civilization with a detailed political system, religion and a legal code—the Sharia. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years in Mecca and got 150 Arabs to convert to Islam. He went to Medina and became a politician and a warlord. After 2 years in Medina, every Jew was murdered, enslaved, or exiled. He was involved in an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks for the last 9 years of his life (The Life of Mohammed, A. Guillaume, Oxford University press, 1955, page 660).
Mohammed, the ‘prophet of Islam,’ died without a single enemy left standing. This was not a religious process, but a political process. Jihad is political action with a religious motivation. Political Islam is the doctrine that deals with the non-Muslim. Mohammed did not succeed with his program of religion, but his political process of jihad triumphed. Sharia law is the political implementation of the Islamic civilization. The political nature of Islam is what creates the major difference between Sharia and Jewish religious law, halakha. Jewish law has nothing to say about non-Jews and explicitly says that the law of the land trumps halakha.
In fifty-five Muslim states the ideology of Sharia has the potential to create several holocausts. A central teaching of the Qu’ran and mainstream Hadiths is to bring the entire world under Islamic rule, and some choose to ignore or be in denial about such scriptures or the intimidation and persecution of non-Muslims by Muslims in countries as wide spread as Egypt, Pakistan, Indonesia, Senegal, Nigeria, Sudan and throughout the world. There may be moderate Muslims, but Islam itself is not moderate. There is no substantial difference between levels of Islam and Islamic fundamentalism: at most there is a difference of degree but not of kind.
The fundamentalists, with greater coherence than moderate or liberal Muslims, have made Islam the basis of a radical utopian ideology that aims to replace capitalism and democracy as the reigning world system. utopian ideology that aims to replace capitalism and democracy as the reigning world system. By embracing a secular worldview, America fails to take any religion (including Islam) seriously. Religion has been portrayed as a sign of weakness, to the extent that those with religious beliefs are considered fundamentally irrelevant. The emerging champions of religion in Western secular thought are those who are classed as “moderates” – or Western type materialists.
Many world leaders are at this moment putting their trust in these twin hopes – that religion is of no consequence and that the moderates, especially in Islam, will ultimately become the most influential group. On both counts such assumptions are fatal. Sayyid Qutb, the very influential Egyptian Muslim thinker, said that “dominion should be reverted to Allah alone, namely to Islam, that holistic system He conferred upon men. An all-out offensive, a jihad, should be waged against modernity so that this moral rearmament could take place. The ultimate objective is to re- establish the Kingdom of Allah upon earth.
The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing. – Albert Einstein