.

.
Library of Professor Richard A. Macksey in Baltimore

POSTS BY SUBJECT

Labels

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Nonie Darwish : The Nice Muslim Family Next Door


  • Where are the articles by moderate Muslims condemning the prominent Muslims who beg Allah to strike infidels with cancer and disease? No practicing Muslim has openly condemned such prayers, or named the sheikhs who urge these brutalities.
The neighbors of the Chechnyan Muslim family whose sons were responsible for the Boston Marathon terror attack said they were stunned by the news and that this nice Muslim family was known for its generosity and kindness. Many Americans often ask, "What about the Muslim family next door? They are really nice people."

Some of the nicest people I know are Muslims, but that must never blind us from understanding the risk we are taking when we allow the building of hundreds of mosques financed by Saudi Arabia, as well as millions of Muslims to migrate into America at a time of a fierce, if sophisticated, desire by Islamist groups to spread Islam throughout the world, and to radicalize impressionable youths by stoking anger against the Western nations, people and values.

The existence of nice, educated Muslims should also never blind us from seeing the deep problems within the ideology of Islam and its jihadist goals.  
Muslims themselves admit that Islam is more than a religion – that it is, in fact, a state, legal system and a military institution—with the goal, as one's holy duty, of bringing Islam to the rest of the world, a desire often enshrined deep in the hearts of Muslims.

Even though our visible problem is with the Muslim jihadists, the so-called "moderate" Muslims have often been silent enablers and defenders, perhaps from inertia, misinformation or fear of reprisals against them, including death threats to them and members of their family should they speak out.

Terrorists could never be as powerful as they are without the prayers, and especially the material support, of Islamic nations, governments and people.

A Muslim Egyptian friend -- one of the nicest people you will ever meet -- visiting in 1994, was crying in front of the television while praying for the people of Chechnya to declare independence from Russia and declare their country an Islamic State ruled by Sharia law.

The critiques of Islam by this author are never written for the purpose of condemning people; naturally, there are good and bad people in every culture. My deep concern springs from the ideology of Islam: it has had such dark implications on Islamic society, forcing many, otherwise perfectly fine people, to enact unthinkable terror, as others stand silently by. Islam is the only religion that requires its followers to kill those who do not believe in Allah, and to take revenge in the name of Allah. In the Quran, holy vengeance and retaliation are commanded for Muslims: "O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you. He who transgresseth after this will have a painful doom."
 [Koran 2:178]. Or: "We shall take vengeance (Muntaquimun) upon the sinners." [32:22] The translation of the Arabic word "Muntaquimun" meaning vengeance is often watered down in translation by using the word punishment or retribution instead.

It was frustrating and unsettling to hear the aunt of the two terrorists stating, from Toronto, Canada, that her two nephews were "set up," and the terrorists' father, Anzor Tsarnaev, stating in various interviews with ABC and other stations, first that his son should give up peacefully; then that the son who was killed was framed; then that the son who was not killed should tell the truth; then warning that if the US kills his son: "all hell will break loose."

Having grown up Muslim, I would urge Americans to demand more from the so called "moderate" Muslims, instead of giving them a pass for their silence, which appears a complicit defense of jihad. For too long, with some courageous exceptions, moderate Muslims hear no evil, see no evil and do nothing about it.
 They stand defiant, behaving as if they were victims, while the cries of Christians suffering under Islam in the Middle East are ignored. (Most Jews were forced out years ago. As the saying in Arabic goes: First the Saturday People, then the Sunday People).
Many moderate Muslims have been insisting that the Boston bombings have "nothing to do with Islam." They deny there is a problem for apostates fleeing Islam, and do nothing about their arrest, the threats against them or their murder.
At least 5,000 reported honor killings happen annually in the name of Allah, but moderate Muslims insist that, too, has nothing to do with Islam, and is a hold-over tribal custom, despite the Sura and verses that are used to justify it [Qur'an (18:65-81], and not only speak out against the practice, but go as far as to threaten those who expose it.
Moderate Muslims also have nothing to say to the hundreds of Islamic clerics who curse non-Muslims and encourage jihad from the pulpits of mosques.

Where are the articles by moderate Muslims condemning the prominent Muslims who beg Allah to strike infidels with cancer and disease?
The holiest mosques of Mecca blast curses at Jews and Christians over microphones -- "Till they pray for death and do not receive it" -- and supplicate Allah to make the lives of Christians and Jews "hostage to misery; drape them with endless despair, unrelenting pain and unremitting ailment; fill their lives with sorrow and pain and end their lives in humiliation and oppression."

No true practicing Muslim, moderate or not, has openly condemned such prayers to pilgrims in Mecca or has named the sheikhs who urge these brutalities. But the majority of moderate Muslims are quick to blame American foreign policy and Israel.
If America cooperates with Islamic dictators, Muslims accuse America of empowering dictators; if America removes a Saddam Hussein to give Muslims a chance for freedom, they accuse the US of interfering in their internal affairs.

The day Usama Bin Laden was killed, a friend called from Egypt to say that everyone was in mourning, sad over Bin Laden's death. Does such a response to the death of a terrorist stem from moderate Islam, radical Islam, or Islam?
Nonie Darwish Author "The Devil We Don't Know" and President of Former Muslims United.
=================

Nonie Darwish : The Problem at the Heart of Egypt's Revolutions


  • This is the central problem in most Muslim countries: the difficult choice between a man-made, civilian, military, "infidel" government, and a totalitarian Islamic theocracy.
This latest revolution in Egypt, the second in the last two years, is a symptom of a deep-rooted problem at the heart of Islam itself: Egypt is on the verge of a civil war to bring a resolution to the never-ending tension between what Islam demands versus what the people really want.

This is the central problem in most Muslim countries: the difficult choice between a civilian, military "infidel" government, and a totalitarian Islamic theocracy.
The problem is compounded when most Egyptians consider themselves both Muslim and lovers of democracy, but refuse to see that Islam and freedom cannot co-exist.
How can Islam anywhere produce a democracy when freedom of speech and religion are outlawed, where there is no free and independent judiciary, and equal rights for women, minorities and non-Muslims are legally suppressed?

Islam also cannot let go of government control: since its inception, Islam has lacked the confidence in its own survival without government enforcement. 
As Muslim Brotherhood leader Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi stated this winter on Egyptian television, "without the 'Death for Apostasy' laws, apostasy laws, Islam would have failed with the death of Mohamed, as people would never stay in this religion otherwise." 

 It is no coincidence therefore that Islamic law dictates that all Muslims must be ruled by Sharia, and declares that all secular governments, made by man, not by Allah, are heresy and an abomination.

While mosques are busy teaching Muslims how to carry out jihad, hate Jews and mistreat Christians, their imams allocate no time to preach the values of peace and trust as a foundation for an orderly society or civilization. As a result of such an Islamic education, Muslims who know they want freedom are unable to build the value system on which to achieve it.

Egypt's dilemma is nothing new, but the good news today is that finally there is an awakening in Egypt regarding the tyranny that Sharia law brings, especially if it is made the basis of a constitution. Despite this awakening, however, not one rebel in Tahrir Square was able openly to carry a sign saying, "Sharia must become null and void." The majority of Egyptians still believe that to say that would be an act of apostasy, punishable by death.

All current surveys still show that the overwhelming majority of Egyptians still support Sharia law, or at least say they do. This is where the problem lies: 
the laws of a society are the mirror of its morality. Egyptians cannot make believe that they can have both Sharia and freedom, or that their laws do not have to match their style of government and what they can feel comfortable with. 
According to Sharia, a Muslim head of state must rule by Islamic law, and must preserve Islam in its original form, or he must be removed from office. Islamic law leaves no choice for any Muslim leader but to accept, at least officially, that Sharia is the law of the land, or else be ousted from office. Sharia also commands Muslims to remove any leader who is not a Muslim. Because of that command, Muslim leaders must play a game of appearing Islamic and anti-West while trying to get along with the rest of the world. It is a game with life and death consequences for them.

That stricture is the reason many Egyptians today agree to keep Sharia in the constitution, even if only symbolically. But how can Egyptians be so naïve to believe they can ignore the laws of their constitution? As long as Sharia is on the books, even if it is ignored, the country can never have true stability and freedom. Even with revolutions, Egyptians can only achieve cosmetic changes with no substance; changes such as, the name of the country, its flag, national anthem, or even putting on or taking off women's hijabs.

Although Egyptians were always exuberant about the removal of a regime or a dictator, they never were about a change in the religious, cultural and moral foundations of the country.
Whether it is the Egyptian revolution of 1919, 1952 or 2011, the change achieved has always been superficial, or for the worse.
Somehow whenever the Muslim mind comes to the underlying religious ideology that is the foundation upon which its systems are erected, it freezes.

The result is a majority of confused citizens whose trust is shattered; moral standards in conflict, and laws and the concept of reality distorted. But how long can this warped existence last undetected? So far it has succeeded for 1,400 years without collapsing, but can this latest revolution be the crack in the stranglehold of Sharia?

Egyptian secularists have achieved a great step against the Muslim Brotherhood, but will they be able to sustain it? The Muslim Brotherhood has powerful roots in the Egyptian psyche, and the Brotherhood has vowed a bloodbath against any secular government.

For any secular government to remain in power, it needs to turn tyrannical and put in jail members of the Muslim Brotherhood. This has already begun; arrest warrants against leaders and 300 members of the Brotherhood were issued within hours of the removal of Morsi.

Egypt is now back to square one; a military dictatorship is, for the moment at least, the only solution that can preserve and sustain a certain level of secularism in the face of the constant Islamic assault that human rights, freedom of religion and democracy.
The assault has also been on the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which, on August 5, 1990, was repudiated and superseded by the Organization of Islamic Conference [OIC] in favor of the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which, in article 24, in its entirety, concludes that "All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari'ah." Article 19(d) also posits that, "There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari'ah."

One can only hope that this military dictatorship will not be like others, which promise elections and freedom, but remain as autocracies for decades.
Nonie Darwish is the author of "The Devil We Don't Know".
================

Nonie Darwish : America's "Arab Spring"


  • President Obama appears to have been told that if all these secular dictators could be brought down, a magnificent Arab Spring would blossom. This was, it seems, precisely the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood: to get America's help to topple the dictatorships -- then mostly military and secular -- but then to replace them with themselves, Islamists.
  • After Egypt took down the Muslim Brotherhood, the goal of establishing the Islamic Caliphate in Egypt simply moved to Syria, the only Arab nation where a secular Muslim leader had survived the Arab Spring.
  • Promoting Islam also seems to have been a major factor in Obama's equation for America. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton followed suit, hosting several closed-door conferences on "Defamation of Religion," to suppress free speech and internationally criminalize any criticism of Islam with fines and prison. She would rather blame terrorism on free speech than on the violent tenets of Islam.
  • This escalating subversion should be reason enough for all Western democratic countries permanently to part company with the United Nations. Its history of corruption is neither new nor surprising, or that it is run anti-democratic "club of dictators" whose interests are opposite to ours.
The goals of U.S. President Barack Obama in the Middle East ended the rule of most of the "secular" Arab leaders in the area. His views may have come, partly at least, from propaganda on why Muslim people supposedly lacked freedom there. Obama appears to have been told that if all these secular dictators could be brought down, a magnificent Arab Spring would blossom.
This was, it seems, precisely the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood: to get America's help to topple the dictatorships -- then mostly military and secular -- but then to replace them with themselves, Islamists.
The goals of the Muslim Brotherhood happened to be in tune with Obama's goals in the Middle East. Obama's first major presidential speech took place in Cairo before a large number of Islamic sheikhs and members of the Muslim Brotherhood. They were empowered and given legitimacy by Obama. A scorned Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak did not attend; thus, with the blessing of the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power in Egypt was begun.

Obama's first major presidential speech, on June 4, 2009, took place in Cairo before a large number of Islamic sheikhs and members of the Muslim Brotherhood. They were empowered and given legitimacy by Obama. A scorned Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak did not attend; thus, with the blessing of the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power in Egypt was begun. (Image source: White House)

Today, ordinary Egyptians link the ascendancy of the Muslim Brotherhood directly to the Obama administration. Cairo was about to become the capital of the new Islamic Caliphate if Egyptians had not, after a year, come out in the millions to stop it.

The Obama administration did not appear happy with the counter-revolution, and the rise to power of Egypt's current president, General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, and began doing everything it could to thwart it.

Egypt was back to square one: a military dictatorship that it had once convinced the West was the cause of its oppression.

America's "Arab Spring" adventure -- to topple secular dictators to bring about democracies -- did not exactly work as planned. Bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East failed miserably, but the tyranny of the Caliphate, which had been the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood in the first place, was building. After Egypt took down the Muslim Brotherhood, the goal of establishing the Islamic Caliphate in Egypt simply moved to Syria, the only Arab nation where a secular Muslim leader had survived the Arab Spring.

Promoting Islam also seems to have been a major factor in Obama's equation for America. Before Obama started to implement his promise to "change America as we know it," he first had to change the Middle East as they knew it. Many of the changes over which he presided were in harmony with the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood. Its motto is: "Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Quran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."
But while the Muslim brotherhood has been made illegal in Egypt, the Obama administration still refuses to label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Under Obama, Islam became untouchable, not open to any kind of criticism. He even claimed that "Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding."

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton followed suit, and hosted several closed-door conferences in Washington and London on "Defamation of Religion," to suppress free speech and internationally criminalize any criticism of Islam with fines and prison.

Even in a recent debate, Clinton stated, "Islam was always part of American history -- even since the Revolutionary War."
She would rather blame terrorism on free speech than on the violent tenets of Islam.
Only a person from the Middle East could understand the immense value of such a gift to the goals of Islamic jihadists in America.

It is unfortunate that many Americans apparently still do not know that Islamists rewrite history in order to claim that any land they wish to conquer was originally Islamic or founded by Muslims -- even though historically Islam did not exist until seventh century, hundreds of years after Judaism and Christianity.

Today, Muslims have re-written their history books to claim that Muslims originally built the ancient Jewish Biblical sites, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) has bowed to the wishes of Qatar and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) -- a bloc of 56 Islamic nations plus "Palestine" -- to back up this fiction. UNESCO recently passed resolutions obscenely declaring ancient Jewish Biblical monuments -- such as Hebron's Cave of the Patriarchs, Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem and Jerusalem's Temple Mount, home of the great ancient Jewish Temples -- Islamic sites.

Which country will be next? This escalating subversion should be reason enough for all Western democratic countries permanently to part company with the United Nations. Its history of corruption is neither new nor surprising, or that it is run anti-democratic "club of dictators" whose interests are opposite to ours.
Jihadists today are stating that they also have a claim over Italy, Greece, and Spain -- and now America. Obama and Hillary Clinton actually just solidified such claims for future Muslim history books about who actually built America.
Americans have a choice: they can either keep on empowering Islam, and helping extremist Muslims infiltrate into the American system -- even as there is a resolution in the House of Representatives to shut down all criticism of Islam -- or they can end the gamble of the current administration, which seems bent on changing America forever by allowing the worldwide empowerment of Islam. They can continue the Islamist "Arab Spring" revolution to change "America as we know it" or preserve the freedoms of the American republic.

It has recently become clear through WikiLeaks that the American system is indeed rigged and that Washington DC has turned into a swamp; or more accurately an "Arab Spring" swamp.
Egypt, on a much smaller scale, had to face such a choice in 2012-13, between life under the values of the Muslim Brotherhood or a life under a sliver of hope for a democracy, which Islam, under its laws, can never allow.
Both Egyptians and the West sorely need to understand that Islamic law, sharia, does not permit anything other than an Islamic government under the rule of Islamic law. Consequently, only military force can stand against sharia tyranny. The Muslim Brotherhood had proven once again that the only way out of Islamic theocracies is through military dictatorships.

A head-on collision over the future of America is underway. Many Americans still do not understand the magnitude of what is at stake, but many Islamists do: they are lying in wait, hoping to return to their budding Caliphate.
Nonie Darwish, a Middle East Expert, is the author of Wholly Different: Why I Chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values."
===================

Nonie Darwish : What About the Cultural Imbalance? ISLAM/WEST


  • If we do not demand equal cultural access, such a cultural imbalance will result in one side absorbing the values of the other, while keeping the Islamic nation "pure" and free of any outside influence. This one-sided cultural tyranny is forcing us, the American citizen, into tolerating intolerance while never expecting anything more aligned to Western values from the Muslim world.
  • As soon as Muslims form a small community inside a Western nation, they immediately deny access to any kind of Biblical preaching or education inside their community, but at the same time apparently feel entitled to demand access to preach the Koran in American prisons and spread Islamic culture and values in American schools.
  • If Muslims finance Islamic Studies departments on American campuses and teach Islam in our public schools, the same rights must be awarded to Americans. It is true there are a few American schools in the Middle East, such as the American University in Cairo, but these schools are forbidden from having departments of Biblical Studies.
  • If Muslim governments and citizens have full access to build mosques in America, America must insist on having the same access in their countries. That is not the fault of Muslim countries, so much as it is the fault of Western "multiculturalism," which expects nothing and is adhered to only by Western nations.
  • If such one-sided access of Islam into the West continues, while other religions in Muslim communities and countries are considered by them illegal "hate crimes," Western culture and the values of free will and religious freedom will atrophy and die. Islamists are counting on Western inertia to win.
Similar to the often-mentioned trade imbalance, there is a large imbalance Western nations and Muslim nations that is hardly ever mentioned: the cultural imbalance.

Muslims have access to build mosques in the West, yet give no access to the West to build churches or synagogues in Muslim countries. Muslim governments finance "Islamic Studies" and "Middle East Studies" departments in almost all major American universities, but will not allow Christian Studies or Judaic Studies departments at any university in the Muslim world. They freely preach Islam everywhere and consider it their right. But not one Muslim country legally permits Christian missionary work, and those few missionaries who dare to try are harshly punished, imprisoned or killed.
As soon as Muslims form a small community inside a Western nation, they immediately deny access to any kind of Biblical preaching or education inside their community, but at the same time apparently feel entitled to demand access to preach the Koran in American prisons and spread Islamic culture and values in American schools.

Evangelical ministers have often been expelled from Arab and Islamic communities. This happened at an Arab festival in Dearborn, Michigan. The city of Dearborn had to apologize for arresting several Christian missionaries who were peacefully preaching to Muslims at the Dearborn Arab International Festival in 2010.

Dearborn police arrest a Christian for the "crime" of peacefully preaching to Muslims at the Dearborn Arab International Festival, in 2010.

It was also reported by the Telegraph that two Christian ministers in the UK were ordered by a "community support officer" to "stop handing out gospel leaflets in a predominantly Muslim area of Birmingham." The local Muslims threatened to beat the pastors, and accused them of committing a "hate crime" against Muslims by preaching the gospel -- while Muslim preachers are preaching Islam and building mosques all over the world.

If such one-sided access of Islam into the West continues, while access to other religions in Muslim communities and countries is considered by them an illegal "hate crime," Western culture and the values of free will and religious freedom will atrophy and die. Western values will be the loser in this equation. Islamists are counting on Western inertia to win.

If Muslim governments and citizens have full access to build mosques in America, America must insist that it has the same access in Muslim countries. The fault is not with the Muslim countries so much as it is the fault of Western "multiculturalism," which expects nothing and is adhered to only by Western nations.

If Muslim countries have the right to proselytize in America, then Americans must insist on having the right to do the same in Muslim countries. If Muslims finance Islamic Studies departments on American campuses and teach Islam in our public schools, then the same rights must be awarded to Americans. It is true there are a few American schools in the Middle East, such as the American University in Cairo, but these schools are forbidden from having departments of Biblical Studies.

The Coptic Christians of Egypt have no access to any services from the Egyptian government to study the Bible. While every school in Egypt teaches Islam and the Koran, Egyptian Christians are left to play instead of being provided with equivalent religious studies.

If we do not demand equal cultural access, American Christians and Jews who live in majority Muslim neighborhoods could one day be forbidden from studying the Bible. Such a cultural imbalance will result in one side absorbing the values of the other while keeping the Islamic nation "pure" and free of any outside influence. This one-sided cultural tyranny is forcing us, the American citizen, into tolerating intolerance while never expecting anything more aligned to Western values from the Muslim world.

For many decades, America has set itself as the light of freedom to the world, an example for the world to emulate. Our politicians and media allowed the signing of agreements to lift up other nations at the expense of the American worker in the hope that the world would eventually reciprocate.
But reciprocation in kind, as planned by the do-gooders in the West, was not given. As Donald Trump said, we give them the money and the jobs and they give us the drugs and unemployment.

Trump's statement struck a nerve among the suffering and hard-working American middle class. No other American politician in recent history has said such a long-awaited comforting statement to the American people, even after 9/11.

It is also time to treat US citizens, culture and values as number one again. Culture matters, and it is time to acknowledge the importance of values, sovereign law, and Western freedoms. The multiculturalists have for too long trampled over American pride, traditional values and Judeo-Christian ethics. The damage done to American national pride and dignity has been profound.

The American and European public has been suffering in silence for too long and getting the short end of the stick from those who were elected to look after their own citizens first. It is time for Western politicians and leaders, from the left and right, to treat their citizens as number one again inside their own countries.
Nonie Darwish, a Middle East Expert born and raised in Egypt, is the author of the upcoming book: "Wholly Different: Why I Chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values."
==================

Nonie Darwish : On Defining Religion


  • What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam and that Muslims must, sooner or later, demand to live under an Islamic government.
  • The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader rather than to see a dictatorship -- secular or theocratic -- as a world leader.
  • Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with "the people of the book" -- Jews and Christians -- but to replace them, after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible.
  • Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and it relies on government enforcement to do so.
  • Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?
Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) said that President Donald Trump's 90-day ban on immigration from seven predominantly Muslim countries is "a religiously based ban," and "if they can ban Muslims, why can't they ban Mormons." This has become the position of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, which has influenced not only the American public but has convinced the majority of the world that America is "bad." How can we blame the world, and even a good segment of American citizens, for hating America when such disingenuous and misleading claims are aired to the world from US officials and broadcast by American television channels?

The majority of the world does not understand that much of the American media is in a propaganda war against the Trump Administration simply because he names Islamic jihad and would prefer to see a strong and prosperous America as a world leader, rather than to see a dictatorship -- secular or theocratic -- as a world leader. 

He ran as a Republican; meanwhile, Democrats and the mainstream media refuse to engage in respectful and legitimate debate on the most vital threat to Western civilization in the twenty-first century: Islam. Truth has become irrelevant; people seem to prefer a political game of tug-of-war to sway public opinion against the Trump Administration, and, presumably, to elect Democrats forever. That is how the system is set up.
Political discussions on television have become extremely frustrating; they have turned into shouting matches and name-calling at the least informative levels. Television hosts often become instigators and participants in the shouting matches. The thinking is apparently that the louder they get, the more attractive the program will be. Meanwhile everyone is talking at once; the viewer cannot hear anyone, so the program could not be more boring.
Under the US Constitution, freedom of religion is protected. and Islam has been welcomed inside the West on that basis as one of the three Abrahamic religions. According to Western values and the Western understanding of the word, "religion" is supposed to be a personal relationship with God, where free will is of utmost importance; the believer has authority only over himself or herself when it comes to religious laws or punishing sins (such as leaving the religion or committing adultery) -- quite different from criminal laws intended to protect society. Western values also allow followers of a religion the freedom to proselytize, but never by resorting to government enforcement.
Bottom line, the Western definition of religion is in harmony with the Biblical values of the human rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and that all human beings are created equal under the law. It is considered a basic Western value to view God, family and country as a top priority.
Now let us compare these values to Islamic values:
  1. Muslim citizens have the right to punish other citizens with humiliating, severe, cruel and unusual punishments such as death, flogging and amputation, for sinning against Allah, the Quran or Islam. Those "crimes" include leaving Islam, being a homosexual, or committing adultery. And if the Islamic government does not enforce such punishments, any Muslim on the street has the right to apply the punishment against another Muslim and not be prosecuted. That is why apostates, such as myself, cannot visit any Muslim county; the fear is not only from Islamic governments but from anyone on the street.
  2. Being a Muslim is not a personal relationship with God, as it is under the Bible, but is enforced by the state at birth. When a child is born in Egypt to a Muslim father, the birth certificate is stamped "Muslim" and all government-issued documents as well. A child must learn Islamic studies in school and practice Islam throughout his life. In Egypt, the twin sons of a Christian divorced mother were forced to take Islamic studies and become Muslim just because their originally-Christian father converted to Islam. Today, in Egypt, I am still considered Muslim and such a status could never change if I ever lived there again.
  3. Islamic law and leaders rely on government enforcement -- under penalty of death -- to keep Muslims within Islam and to convert the minority Christian population into Islam. Islamic sharia law, obliges Islamic states to enforce religious law, and if the Muslim head of state refuses to follow religious law, sharia permits the public to use force to remove the head of state from office.
  4. Islam claims to be an Abrahamic religion, but in fact Islam came to the world 600 years after Christ, not to affirm the Bible but to discredit it; not to co-exist with "the people of the book," Jews and Christians, but to replace them -- after accusing them of intentionally falsifying the Bible. Islam was created as a rebellion against the Bible and its values, and relies on government enforcement to do so.
The tenets above are just a few of the differences in values between Islam, the Bible and the Western concept of religion. What the West does not understand is that Islam admits that government control is central to Islam, and Muslims must demand to live under an Islamic government sooner or later. That might explain the reason for the eternal violence in nearly all Muslim countries, between government being in the hands of a religious theocracy or of the military. Islam, as it is practiced today, has violated all Western definitions of religion and values.
Political and legal (sharia) Islam is much more than a religion. Is the First Amendment a suicide pact?

Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of "Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values."
===================

Nonie Darwish : Urgent Messages to the Muslim World


  • A dangerous message is being sent to the Muslim world by the West: There is nothing that moderate Muslims or anyone else should fear from radical Islamic terrorism! Look at us Western governments! We are bringing in refugees who cannot be vetted even if they are ISIS infiltrators. In fact, we in the West are so goodhearted that we are encouraging many organizations to operate legally in the West under the banner of the Muslim Brotherhood -- even organizations that are sympathetic to the terrorist group Hamas and that are pledging to overthrow us!
  • The West, by taking all the Syrian refugees, is emptying Syria of any kind of resistance to the Caliphate (ISIS). The West's compassion, by taking in the refugees escaping ISIS, will end up leaving only the radicals to rule unopposed in Syria and Iraq. This, in US foreign policy, is not compassion; it is gross negligence and reckless endangerment.
  • "Tough love" is badly needed when dealing with the Muslim world. We must say: No, we cannot accept your jihadist aspirations. We cannot accept you forcing your way of life on the world; your way of life is unacceptable to us. Before you send your refugees, you must end your "us against them" jihadist culture. The civilized world no longer finds your aspirations for an Islamic Caliphate tolerable.
The first reaction of the U.S. after 9/11 should have been to stop visas from all majority-Muslim countries, except for those of utmost importance. But our politicians' hands were tied -- not by fear of a backlash from Islamic countries, which probably expected a U.S. boycott, but by fear of a backlash from the Western media and Western progressives.

The decision to keep Muslims, refugees and others pouring into the US after 9/11 was wrong and has not done Islam and Muslim reformers a favor. Here is why:

The chaos and bloodshed in the Muslim world, even in the most moderate of Muslim nations, such as Turkey, is between Muslims who want to enforce Islamic sharia law, totally and upon everyone by a theocratic government, and those who want less sharia by installing military rule. The West does not understand that the only form of government that can stand up to a totalitarian Islamic theocracy is a military one and no other. Who could imagine that a military junta could be considered the only savior from Islamic tyrannies that require everyone to live totally, 100%, under the laws of sharia?

When former U.S. President Barack Obama honored the Muslim Brotherhood with his first major speech as president, who were his guests of honor in the first rows? Leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. The less-radical Islamist military form of governments in the Middle East were left out and thus weakened.
Then Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who had a murky relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, got the message. He did not attend. With Obama's move, the balance of power between the two combative forces over control of government immediately favored the Muslim Brotherhood. It officially, for the first time since its founding in 1928, took control of the Egyptian government after the 2011 chaos of the "Arab Spring."
A year later, 22 million Egyptians had to undergo a bloody counter-revolution to bring back the type of government Egyptians have always favored over an Islamic theocracy.

When former U.S. President Barack Obama gave his first major Presidential speech in Cairo, in 2009, his guests of honor in the first rows were leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. The less-radical Islamist military form of governments in the Middle East were left out and thus weakened. (Image source: White House)

Now, another, dangerous, message is being sent to the ordinary citizens of the Muslim world by the liberal West: There is nothing that moderate Muslims or anyone else should fear from the possible infiltration of radical Islam! Look at us, Western governments! We are bringing in refugees who cannot be vetted even if they are ISIS infiltrators. Although the Muslim Brotherhood is illegal and considered a terrorist organization in several Muslim countries, we in the West do not mind them at all. In fact, we in the West are so kind-hearted and welcoming that we are encouraging many organizations to operate legally in the West under the banner of the Muslim Brotherhood -- even organizations that are sympathetic to the terrorist group Hamas and that are pledging to overthrow us! See how we are courageous, self-confident and free of "Islamophobia"!

By embracing the Muslim Brotherhood as not dangerous to free societies and by bringing in refugees from terror-infested areas of the Middle East, we are sending a message to moderate Muslims in the Middle East: Citizens in the West are not even bothering to protect their free system from being conquered by sharia-lovers, so perhaps the dreams of the Caliphate are not that bad after all.

The West, by taking all the Syrian refugees, is not just sending the above "unintended" message; it is also emptying Syria of any kind of resistance to the Caliphate (ISIS). The West's compassion, by taking in the refugees escaping ISIS, will end up leaving only the radicals to rule unopposed in Syria and Iraq.

A US foreign policy that recommends absorbing unvetted Muslim refugees has been advocated as compassion, but in fact it is gross negligence and reckless endangerment to U.S. citizens, Western freedoms and democracy.
There are unintended consequences to rescuing all Muslim refugees:
  • We are telling Muslim reformists, wrongly, especially in the Middle East, that there is nothing to fear from ISIS infiltration.
  • By not declaring the Muslim Brotherhood a terror organization we are yet again legitimizing and empowering it.
  • By not showing the proper angry response to Islamic terrorism, the West is not perceived as gracious, but as weak.
By taking in Islam and its refugees without proper vetting, the West is not doing either Islam or Muslims any favor: for the reformists, it is shutting out any hope of reform.

Tough love is badly needed when dealing with the Muslim world. We must say: No, we cannot accept your jihadist aspirations. We cannot accept you forcing your way of life on the world; your way of life is unacceptable to us. Before you send your refugees, you must end your "us against them" jihadist culture. The civilized world no longer finds your aspirations for an Islamic Caliphate tolerable.
If the West has the courage to do that, perhaps one day history will attribute the reformation of Muslim world partly to strength and conviction of Western resolve against tyranny and human suffering.
Nonie Darwish, born and raised in Egypt, is the author of the new best-selling book, "Wholly Different; Why I chose Biblical Values over Islamic Values".
================

Canada: Bring on the Islamization!


  • The mayor of Brampton, Ontario, Linda Jeffrey, was also seemingly unconcerned about the calls in Toronto to murder Jews.
  • The political establishment also does not seem concerned that imams are saying that the Islamic ruling allowing slaves is still in force. Meanwhile, statistics show that when it comes to hate crimes, Jews are by far the most targeted group.
  • No one -- neither media, nor politicians -- even bothered to ask whether there is a significant connection between the virulent Jew-hatred being preached in mosques and the disproportionately high occurrence of hate crimes against Jews. Instead, the entire Canadian parliament is preoccupied with banning "Islamophobia".
Imams in Canadian mosques have been inciting the killing of "infidels", primarily Jews, for years. This agitation appears to have had no visible impact on Canadian parliamentarians, evidently too busy with petitions and motions banning alleged "Islamophobia".
In 2009, for example, Toronto-area imam Said Rageah, at the Abu Huraira Centre, called on Allah to "destroy" the enemies of Islam from within and "damn" the "infidel" Jews and Christians.
"Allah protect us from the fitna [sedition, affliction] of these people; Allah protect us from the evil agenda of these people; Allah destroy them from within themselves, and do not allow them to raise their heads" prayed the imam.
In 2012, Sheikh Abdulqani Mursal, imam at Masjid Al Hikma mosque in Toronto, explained that Jews are destined to be killed by the Muslims. Citing text from a hadith, he said:
"You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them... Muslims [will] kill them until the Jews [will] hide themselves... and a stone or a tree [will] say: Muslim... there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him...."
In 2014, imam Sayed AlGhitawi, at Al Andalous Islamic Center in Montreal, prayed for success in jihad and the total destruction of the Jews:
"O Allah, give victory to our brothers who engage in jihad... destroy the accursed Jews... make their children orphans and their women widows... kill them one by one... do not leave any of them [alive]".
During the Muslim holiday of Ramadan in 2016, Imam Ayman Elkasrawy, of the Masjid Toronto mosque, said the following:
"...O Allah! Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Give us victory over the disbelieving people... Give victory to Islam... humiliate the ...polytheists... Destroy anyone who displaced the sons of the Muslims...Count their number; slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!"
Another imam in Toronto, Shaykh Abdool Hamid, recited similar prayers on at least eight occasions in 2015 and 2016.
In February 2017, after being exposed as an extremist by CIJ News, imam Ayman Elkasrawy apologized for his words, which, despite being posted on YouTube, were apparently not meant to reach non-Arabic speaking Canadians:
"Neither I, Masjid Toronto or the congregation harbour any form of hate towards Jews. And so I wish to apologize unreservedly for misspeaking during prayer last Ramadan... "
The head of the mosque, Dr. El-Tantawy Attia, assured the Toronto Sun that his mosque was not a radical mosque:
"It was a mistake. It was not authorized. It should not have happened and we have apologized and I have personally reached out to my Jewish friends... I was so upset. I was surprised. In 45 years here, I had never heard anything like that."
He also assured the Toronto Sun that he and the mosque would "get to the bottom of this through their own investigation". He also said that, pending the probe, the imam had been "suspended". The head of the mosque, however, then said that he doubts if Ayman Elkasrawy "really meant it". "We are about peace", he added.
Of course they are.
Even more astonishing than the disingenuous, mock-shock apology from the imam, was the staggering willingness on the part of the public to believe it. Instead of waiting for the police investigation, the Toronto Sun reported that, "People of all walks of life, and faiths, formed a 'ring around' the mosque to protect it from 'Islamophobia'".
Ayman Elkasrawy, imam of the Masjid Toronto mosque (front row, wearing white), said on video: "... slay them one by one and spare not one of them... Give us victory over the disbelieving people... Give victory to Islam... Purify Al-Aqsa Mosque from the filth of the Jews!" (Image source: Video screenshot from Masjid Toronto via The Rebel)
The mayor of Brampton, Ontario, Linda Jeffrey, was also seemingly unconcerned about the calls in Toronto to murder Jews. Instead, she found time to criticize parents who were protesting Muslim Friday prayer sessions -- taking place on public school grounds, on school time and including prayers and sermons, usually in Arabic -- as "purveyors of misinformation and hateful speech."
While the political establishment is busy vilifying those who have legitimate reservations about the potential Islamization of the public school system, the University of Toronto at Mississauga employs a Muslim convert, Dr. Katherine Bullock, as a lecturer in the Department of Political Science. In November 2014, Bullock participated in a panel discussion organized by the Muslim Law Students Association at York University on counter-radicalization in Canada.
In her presentation, Bullock said that the West has it all wrong when it comes to the definition of Muslim radicals:
"So if you're an Iraqi nationalist who doesn't believe that the United States should be occupying your country and you fight against them, and you believe in the Caliphate, and you believe in Sharia, you are a radical, you've been radicalized. But from an Islamic point of view [there is] absolutely nothing radical about wanting Caliphate or wanting Sharia. These are completely normal traditional points of view".
At least Bullock is being honest.
The political establishment also does not seem concerned that imams are saying that the Islamic ruling allowing slaves is still in force. Dr. Ewis El Nagar, head of the Islamic Edicts Committee of the Quebec Council of Imams and leader of dawah (outreach, "call to Islam") at the Canadian Islamic Centre in Montreal, says that the Islamic ruling on marrying slave girls[1] was not abrogated and is applicable when "legitimate jihad" is launched against unbelievers.
Canada's political establishment also does not seem concerned with prominent imams who advocate wife-beating. The Muslim chaplain of the Canadian army, Dr. Mohammad Iqbal Masood Al-Nadvi - who is also the Chairperson of the Canadian Council of Imams and the President of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Canada, a nation-wide organization with close ties to the terrorist group Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood -- explained the Quranic verse on wife-beating[2] in February 2015: "This is the point where for example Quran says... and Hadith says, if you are doing this thing, you can beat or can leave [avoid sleeping with the wife]... Just keep the issue among each other". In other words, it is fine to beat your wife, just keep it behind closed doors.
Meanwhile, statistics show that when it comes to hate crimes, Jews are by far the most targeted group in Canada. According to the Toronto Police Service Annual Hate/Bias Crime Statistical Report for 2015:
"The three most targeted groups since 2006 have been the Jewish community, the Black community and the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) community. In 2015, the Jewish community, followed by the LGBTQ community and the Muslim community were the most victimized groups. The three most reported criminal offences motivated by hate/bias in 2015 were mischief to property, assault and criminal harassment. The Jewish community was the most victimized group for mischief to property occurrences, while the LGBTQ community was the most victimized group for assault occurrences. The Muslim community was the most victimized group for criminal harassment occurrences".
According to the most recently available national data, between 2011 and 2013 Canadian Muslims suffered 15.1 hate crime incidents per 100,000 people. Canadian Jews, on the other hand, were the victims of 185.4 incidents per 100,000 people. That means, Jews were 12 times more likely to be targeted in hate crimes than Muslims.
Not only are Canadian politicians evidently unconcerned about this, despite the longevity of the problem, but no one -- neither media, nor politicians -- even bothered to ask whether there is a significant connection between the virulent Jew-hatred being preached in mosques, such as those mentioned above, and the disproportionately high occurrence of hate crimes against Jews. Instead, the entire Canadian parliament is preoccupied with banning "Islamophobia".
Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.

[1] "O Prophet, We have made lawful for you your wives whose bridal dues you have paid, and the slave-girls you possess from among the prisoners of war..." — Quran 33:50.
[2] "Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them..." — Qur'an 4:34.

==============