Arab Intellectual Calls For The Arab World To Leave Backwardness And Embrace A More Tolerant And Enlightened Approach

We’re not the only ones fed-up with Muslim bullshit around the world. Some of their own are fed-up as well, and want to abandon a life of human savagery, step out of the dark ages into some kind of civility, and lead their lives in peace, while evolving as human beings and contributing to humanity and the betterment of the world.
Far fetched fairytales? Maybe.

Arab Intellectual Calls For Theological-Cognitive Revolution To Extricate Arab World From Backwardness, Crises, And Internecine Warfare

Hashem Saleh, an Arab intellectual of Syrian origin who currently resides in Morocco, wrote in his August 10, 2013 column in the London-based daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat that in order to extricate itself from crises, backwardness and internecine warfare, the Arab and Muslim world must undergo a theological-cognitive revolution. He explained that it must discard the approach of rejecting the other and embrace a more tolerant and enlightened approach – like the revolution experienced by Europe three centuries ago. Saleh adds that since we are in the era of an information revolution and globalization, this process can take place more quickly than it did in Europe, and could take as little as three decades.

The following are excerpts from his column:[1]

Hashem Saleh (image: Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, London, August 30, 2013)

“In Europe, Three Ideological Revolutions Of Liberation Occurred Before Christianity Made Its Peace With Modernity – Whereas In The Entire Arab Or Muslim World No Such Revolution Has Ever Occurred”

“Can we skip the historical stages [that Europe went through]? If only that were possible! Unfortunately, this is impossible. I really wish I could shut my eyes and reopen them to see Syria transformed into a tranquil and prosperous country like Holland, or Egypt resembling France, or Tunisia as verdant as Switzerland, etc. [I wish] I could skip over 300 years of political tyranny, civil wars, sectarian massacres and boorish fundamentalism…

“In Europe, three ideological revolutions of liberation occurred before Christianity made its peace with modernity, whereas in the entire Arab or Muslim world no such revolution has ever occurred. That is why there are currently terrifying clashes [between the people and the regime] in Egypt and in additional [Arab] countries – because the MB is holding back national progress towards modernity, tolerance and liberty.

“How then can we make peace with ourselves? How can we solve the problem of religious and sectarian struggles while we are still stuck in the theological stage of takfir [accusing the other Muslims of apostasy] – a stage Europe went through at least 150 years ago?

“When two Germans meet in China or Japan or at the ends of the earth, do you think that the first question that pops into their minds is the other’s religion – whether he is a Protestant or [perhaps] a stubborn Catholic? Absolutely not! This does not enter their minds at all, while this would be the first question to pop into the mind of a Syrian or Lebanese, or any Arab, upon encountering a [fellow Arab] in Paris… The reason for this is that Germany solved the problem of sectarianism – first of all from a theoretical standpoint, thanks to the [philosophers Immanuel] Kant, [George Wilhelm Friedrich] Hegel and [Johann Gottlieb] Fichte and other enlightened people, and subsequently from a political standpoint, [thanks to] Bismarck[2] and his successors.

“Therefore, this issue is currently settled [in Germany] and totally ingrained [in the minds] of the German people and in their school curricula, and poses no impediment in Germany, [for] it is already behind them. All are citizens with equal rights and obligations, all are Germans of the same rank: there is no first-class German and another who is second or third class… Therefore, German national unity is as solid as a mountain. The same applies to French national unity, etc.

“[However], we need only return to the 17th century in order to find a mire of destructive religious wars, when a Protestant could not countenance a Catholic, and vise versa. They fought and slaughtered each other over [the issue of] identity, as we are currently doing. This [intolerance] continued to plague them for the entire duration of the 18th century. Otherwise, the need for the Enlightenment would not have arisen.”

“Must We Wait 200 Years In Order To Solve The Problem Of Sectarianism? The Answer Is No…”

“Someone should ask: Must we wait 200 years in order to solve the problem of sectarianism? The answer is no, [and this] for two reasons. First, because we are living in the era of the information revolution, which abbreviates times and distances. Therefore, something that once took 200 [years] to digest can [now] be digested in half a century. Second, because we are [currently] immersed in global modernity, and development is therefore accelerated. The Western and Eastern superpowers keep an eye on us and we can do or say nothing [without their knowledge]. Until recently, in particular before September 11, [2001], the sheikhs in the mosques could malign other faiths [and say] whatever they fancied, without criticism. But now there are international conferences for interfaith dialogue, for rapprochement between the various Islamic schools of thought, etc.

“There is a third reason as well – namely that the achievements of the advanced countries are available to us, thus sparing us the necessity to invent or reinvent anything. [These achievements] are ours [to benefit from, no less than] the rest of mankind. The philosophies of Kant or Hegel or [Jürgen] Habermas are not the property of the Germans alone, [just as] the philosophy of Ibn Rushd,[3] in its time, was the property of all Europeans.

“Nevertheless, this does not mean that the sectarian problem, which causes us to lose sleep and tears apart our national unity, will be solved within two or three years. This is a huge and critical historical problem that will not be easily solved, [certainly] not in the space of one or two generations. I wish I were wrong, but what increases my pessimism is that, hitherto, it has been taboo in the Muslim world to apply the method of critical historical [analysis and use it to challenge] our entrenchment in tradition. Only the Pakistani Fadl Al-Rahman[4] and the Algerian Muhammad Arkoun[5] did this, but [they worked] outside the Muslim world: the first at the University of Chicago and the second at the Sorbonne. Had the two remained in their countries, they would have been unable to freely conduct research in [this] most sensitive field, and they could not have bestowed upon us all their innovative and prominent works. One should add to this duo the author Abdelwahab Meddeb,[6] with his splendid liberal works.”

“Without Applying The Deconstructionist Method To Tradition, We Will Not Be Able To Rid Ourselves Of The Alienating Takfiri Approach To Religion”

“Without applying the deconstructionist method[7] to tradition, we will not be able to rid ourselves of the alienating takfiri approach to religion that excludes the other [and was created] in medieval times. Once we rid ourselves of this perspective, we can recognize the fact that a number of paths to Allah exist, rather than a single path as the extremists argue. Most surprisingly, the Koran [itself] recognizes the legitimacy of religious pluralism, [as it states:] ‘If Allah willed it, He could have made them of one religion’ [Qur’an 42:8]. But the clerics on the satellite channels don’t [recognize this]. Are the words of mortals more elevated than the words of the Koran?

“This decisive cognitive leap in the Christian West took over 300 years, until [the Church] dared to implement it in the Second Vatican [Ecumenical] Council[8] in 1962-1965, where the Vatican for the first time abandoned the theology that accused the other of heresy and adopted in its stead the theology of liberation and enlightened faith, a faith of massive expanse which contains room for all Allah’s decent creations, whatever their faith or belief may be.”

“We Can Make This Leap Within The Next 30 Years, And Don’t Require 300 Years [For This Purpose] – [Though] It Means Skipping Over Or Shortening [Historical] Stages”

“We can make this leap within the next 30 years, and don’t require 300 years [for this purpose] – [though] it means skipping over or shortening [historical] stages. However, the digestion of such a huge religious revolution by the popular masses will take much longer. Furthermore, not only the [simple] masses require emancipation, but also many intellectuals or pseudo-intellectuals and opportunist political activists. Some are much more dangerous [than the masses], because they profess modernity and democracy, but then, at the first opportunity, they submit themselves to the Sheikhs of takfir and darkness

“The timeframes that I have presented regarding the outlook for Arab development are [purely] estimates. In some cases I said 30 years, in others 50 or even 70 years. [But what I] mean to say is that something will undoubtedly occur in the Islamic world in the course of the upcoming years – something that the world is breathlessly anticipating.”


[1] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), August 10, 2013.

[2] Otto von Bismarck (1815–1898), chancellor of the Prussian Empire and then of Imperial Germany. He was one of Germany’s most prominent statesmen and the architect of the German Unification.

[3] Abu Al-Walid Ibn Rushd (1126–1198), also known as Averroes, a Cordova-born Muslim physician and philosopher who greatly influenced medieval European philosophy. He wrote on many subjects, but is famous primarily for his commentaries on and critique of Aristotelian theory.

[4] Fadl Al-Rahman (1919-1988), a prominent Pakistani intellectual whose studies on Islam are widely circulated in Western universities and cultural circles.

[5] Muhammad Arkoun (1928-2010), a prominent Algerian researcher of Islamic history and philosophy, who studied and later taught at the Sorbonne in Paris and subsequently in Berlin and London. His research is characterized by a critique of Islamic principles, and he advocated secularism, humanism a modern approach to Islam.

[6] Abdelwahab Meddeb (born 1946), a Tunisian intellectual and author living in France who teaches comparative literature at the University of Paris. He opposes Islamic fundamentalism and calls upon educated Arabs to adopt progressive values of independent thinking instead of a reliance on religion and tradition.

[7] Deconstruction: a philosophical movement and theory of literary criticism that questions traditional assumptions about certainty, identity, and truth.

[8] The Second Vatican Council was an Ecumenical Council of the Roman Catholic Church (comprising Bishops from the entire Christian world) that was formed at the directive of Pope John XXIII in 1962. It discussed the modernization of the Church: its changing role in the modern world, a modern approach to the scriptures, greater openness to other streams in Christianity and the relationship with members of other faiths.


0 thoughts on “Arab Intellectual Calls For The Arab World To Leave Backwardness And Embrace A More Tolerant And Enlightened Approach”

  1. There is a serious problem with Islam that Christianity did not have, for all its faults.
    Although Christian attitudes to strangers amongst them was often murderous, there is nothing in the direct words of Jesus stating that members of a different sect or faith are not truly human. Basic Christianity, therefore does not hold with the idea of different levels of human-ness (whatever the various churches superimposed later).
    Unfortunately in Islam there was from the start a well-developed concept of different categories of human being, subject to different punishments for the same crimes, different taxes, and different privileges. This is a seductive quick fix for a new religion to take up–it means that the members of the Top Faith have all sorts of rights that the others do not. But it also means that not only are members of other faiths subjected to restrictions and unequal legal treatment as not-quite-humans but Moslems of differing sects are also lumped into similar categories of subjugation, with justification for this in the words of Mohammed himself.
    Although Christians have been at war for centuries, and the priests of the various sects have interpreted their versions of Christianity more or less violently, they can get along when they are so inclined because there is no recorded direct instruction from Jesus not to.
    On the other hand, the founder of Islam is quite clear about deviants of any sort. Even leaving aside the Moslem attitude to different faiths (which does Moslem culture no good), I cannot see how the problem of Moslem antagonism to different Moslems, each sect believing it is the correct line, can be solved without actively disobeying the words of Mohammed as quoted in the Koran.

    1. You have a completely skewed and misinformed understanding of Christian history. Christianity has not initiated wars and bloodshed through history at all. Neither has most other religions. What they were engaged in is bloody wars to protect themselves from Islamic invasions. The crusaders were heroes who made it possible for us to live in the free world we live in today. Without them our counties would have been like Saudi Arabia. Its time for us to have gratitude for their sacrifices they underwent.

      1. No, I haven’t misunderstood the nature of Christianity. What I said is that Jesus preached one thing but very often his message was ignored by his followers I can add that sometimes this was for self defence and sometimes it was for political advantage, sometimes it was necessary and sometimes it was simple greed. But the important point is that although Popes and priests might have commanded violence as a religious duty, Jesus never did.

        This means that when Christianity wishes to go back to the message of the New Testament it can do so and there are no commands to take slaves or to beat women to be found there–quite the opposite. The problem with Islam is that any believing Moslem who goes back to the message of the Koran will find only commands about subduing infidels who are subhuman and defining their worth as only half a Moslem life.

        It would be very difficult for believing Moslems to square this belief system with democracy, self-criticism and an abhorrence of slavery. In order to create a free-thinking environment for scientific and social progress, a great deal of what Mohammed was supposed to have said would have to be ditched.

  2. We are to love Muslims, not Islam

    We are to preach in the love of God.

    Christians are to love Muslims, but not Islam. In fact, the Bible instructs Christians to go into the entire world and preach the “gospel” to everyone.

    Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”

    John 14:6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

    Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he has sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.
    And we are to preach in love. Yes, God loves Muslims and we are to love Muslims. In fact it is because we love Muslims that we want to set them free from Islam, and once they are free they are no longer Muslims.

    To love Muslims, however, does not mean that we are to allow them to bring Islam into our country and lives. Mark 16:15 (above) very clearly says that we are to “Go into all the world and preach the Gospel,” not to invite Islam to come home with us. And, in fact, Islam is an antiChrist—teaching against the love of God (against salvation)—teaching that Jesus is not God (not divine), that He did not die on a cross and that he did not raise from the dead.
    I John 2:18 Little children, it is the last hour. Just as you heard that an antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour.

    I John 2:22 Who is the liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, even he that denieth the Father and the Son.

    Muslims deny the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost—refusing to accept the Gospel. Most Muslims are, as Islamic law states, born Muslims and live in Islamic controlled states, (i.e., are governed by Sharia law), which is not the social justice system we have established in our United States Constitution. Sharia law and our United States Constitution do not mix: Islam opposes any form of democracy. Islam is in fact a fascist totalitarianism—teaching that Islam is a nation of Muslims no matter where they live. It is for this reason that they are instructed to implement Sharia law wherever they go. Sharia law is in fact their constitution.

    NOTE: Christians are not born Christians and this is the great failure of the Roman Catholic church, which does the same as Islam. According to Roman Catholicism Christians are born Christians and in fact the pope claims in paragraph 841 of the Catholic Church Catechism (CCC) that Muslims are going to heaven with Roman Catholics. The Bible says no such thing. In fact the Bible says the exact opposite. The pope is, in fact, another anti-Christ.


    “Islam, by the nature of its very doctrine, appeals to man’s baser nature. It promotes intolerance, hatred, discrimination, and much more:

    Qur’an:61:2 “O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.

    Truth be told as bitter as it may be. Islam is a violent ideology. Islam is anything but a religion of peace. Violence is at the very core of Islam. Violence is institutionalized in the Muslim’s holy book, the Quran, in many suras:

    Qur’an:9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”

    Qur’an:9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”

    Qur’an:8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”

    Qur’an:8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”

    Beware! Islam is lying to you

    The greatest danger to mankind today is that Muslims permit, even require themselves to lie.

    In most communities lying is very deeply frowned upon and in a court of law is unacceptable. When a person in U.S.A. takes the oath, “I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God” the oath means exactly that, i.e., God does not lie, nor does He permit anyone to lie. Most of our laws today are based upon the Judeo-Christian belief that Satan (the devil) “is the father of all lies,” and that “when he lies, he speaks his native language.” (John 8:44) It is for this reason that lying in a court in Western societies is a very serious crime known as “perjury,” and if a person violates his or her oath to speak the truth in a court of law, there are stiff penalties, including prison time.

    NOTE: For there to be happiness, as in “the pursuit of happiness” written in the U.S. Constitution, we must have “truth and justice for all.” The lie is ultimately only to “steal and kill and destroy.” John 10:10

    The Muslim’s opinion of lying comes from an expedient opportunistic perspective and is rooted in the Qur’an and hadiths which Muslims claim to be their “holy books” and thus fall within the legal category of what is permissible for Muslims under Islamic (Shari’a) law. In other words what we in Western societies know to be unlawful and something to be ashamed of, is claimed by Islam to be lawful and and nothing to be ashamed of. Obviously, there is aclash here and it is not merely a clash of civilizations as Samuel Huntington wrote of in his book. It is, in fact, a spiritual clash between the truth and the lie. Muslims say that speech is to accomplish objectives and that lying has its benefits. But having been presented with that perspective we can easily argue that lying is selling your soul to the devil, that is if you believe that the devil is evil.

    Muslim clerics, as seen in the picture above, use their Qur’an and hadiths to instruct Muslims to tell outright lies or ninety-nine truths and then a lie, all the while with the intent to deceive.

    Islam permits lying for three reasons. One form of lying is generally known in Arabic as taqiyya and is mostly directed towards non-Muslims as outright dissimulation (to hide under a false appearance). Another form is generally known as “kitman” and is very similar to taqiyya, but rather than outright dissimulation is telling only part of the truth with “mental reservation” considered by Islam to justify the omission of the full truth.

    Many Muslims claim that lying can be beneficial to Muslims and non-Muslims, but the truth is that the Qur’an and hadiths also instruct Muslims to murder non-Muslims who refuse to be conquered by Islam, and once under Islamic rule are to be wrongfully discriminate against. The truth is that this is the Islamic intent, (i.e., to conquer and discriminate against non-Muslims), and is why the Qur’an and hadiths permit lying to non-Muslims. Therefore, it is a fact that there is no truth in islam, none whatsoever. From its very inception Islam was intended to deceive and Muslims are, themselves, suffering under the lies. Many Muslims, in fact, fear other Muslims, none of them submitting to God, but as the Bible says to their father, the devil. John 8:43-58

    NOTE: Jesus taught love, in which there is no fear, whereas the Qur’an teaches murder and which is the cause of Islamic terrorism.

    “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.” I John 4:18

    “Slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem.” Qur’an 9:5

    The vast majority of Western leaders today ignore Islam’s instructions to Muslims to unashamedly lie and murder. In fact under the instruction of the Qur’an Muslims do not believe it is murder, but for “Allah”. It obviously does not seem to matter to most Western leaders that Muslims are known in Islamic nations for repeatedly violating their oaths (treaties). And instead of calling it as it is, most Western leaders today speak favorably of Islam, welcoming it into Western societies, doing so in an effort to befriend Islam.

    NOTE: Israel is not Islam’s only target today. Islam has since its inception taken many nations by the sword. Yes, the Qur’an and hadiths instruct Muslims to kill Jews and Christians who oppose Islam and once their nations are conquered must submit to the dictates of Islam as second class citizens, ridiculed and required to pay higher taxes than Muslims.

    “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and his apostle nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya (religious tax) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.” Quran 9:29

    Islam is not democratic and the Qur’an says Jews and Christians, (i.e., “the people of the Book”) are “apes,” “pigs,” “dogs,” “worse than cattle,” and “Islam’s enemies”. Qur’an 2:64; 5:59-60; 7:159-166; 7:176; 25:44)

    And this they claim to be the instruction revealed by a god (“Allah”) and is their belief of the true essence of Jews and Christians.

    Nevertheless, our Western leaders continue to negotiate with Islamic leaders even though they know that the Quran instructs Muslims to lie to non-Muslims and that lying is considered totally acceptable. Lying to non-Muslims is, in fact, demanded by Islam to advance the cause of Islam – to draw out non-Muslims’ vulnerability and then defeat them.

    The Qur’an:

    Qur’an (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that “compel” a Muslim to lie.

    Qur’an (3:28) – Tells Muslims not to take non-Muslims as friends.

    Qur’an (2:225) – “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths.”

    Qur’an (6:2) – “Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths.”

    Qur’an (3:54) – “And they schemed, and Allah schemed: Allah is the greatest of schemers.”

    NOTE: The Arabic word used in the Qur’an for scheme (or plot) is “makara,” which literally means deceit. If “Allah” is deceitful, then obviously Muslims are instructed to do the same. Also see Qur’an 8:30 and 10:21.

    Qur’an (77:38) – Allows the Muslim to use any stratagem.

    When you read these Qur’anic verses in context with the sayings and example of Muhammad in the hadiths, it is obvious that Islam allows Muslims to lie to one another and non-Muslims. Muhammad is long dead, but his life is Islam’s paradigm/role model.

    According to Islamic Sharia law (the rules that define how a Muslim should behave in all circumstances) deception is not only permitted in certain situations, but is also obligatory.

    This bus is covered with two of Islam’s lies. And you will not get true answers to your questions about Islam from a Muslim. Muhammad did not share the way of life of Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus, and you will not gain peace with lies.

    Muslims say that the Qur’anic verses about lying apply “only to war,” but they do not tell you that the hadiths also permit them to lie to other Muslims, that non-Muslims cannot be friends with Muslims and that Muslims are allowed to break a truce (treaty) whenever they choose and without warning. The Qur’an and hadiths clearly say that non-Muslims are the “enemy”. For example, the hadith Al-Bukhari recorded that ABu Ad-Darda’ said, “We smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them.”

    It is unwise to believe Muslims when they say, “Islam is a religion of peace.” In fact, he teachings and dictates of Islam in the Qur’an and hadiths reveal that the exact opposite is true: Lying, violence and terrorism are, in fact, rooted in the Qur’an and hadiths. Obviously, these books define the character and intent of Islam as Hitler’s Mein Kampf defined Hitler’s objectives and demand Muslims to lie for their war against non-Muslims. In fact it can be easily argued that Muslims (as their “holy books” require of them) are constantly at war. There is, in fact, no evidence of love or “peace” in Islam.

    There are Muslims who say that they do not follow the Qur’an, and there are other Muslims who say that they are “against violence and terrorism.” But the problem is that we cannot know if they are speaking the truth. This is exactly why we do not trust Islam’s leaders in Iran’s when they claim that they are not developing nuclear weapons and missiles to deliver nuclear warheads. And these same leaders in Iran have many times previously lied to us.

    Most Westerners today are unwilling to sacrifice for their children’s future, many of them don’t even want children. Instead, they work to entertain themselves—enjoying a thoroughly corrupt United Nations and with Russia and China ignoring the sufferings of others. Most Westerners today claim to be “pacifists,” but are, in fact, selfish hypocrites—speaking of “human rights” while they, in fact, do not protect their own “rights” from the arbitrary acts of their own abusive leaders. The words “democracy” and “human rights” are in the West today only ink on paper, because Western people today refuse to challenge their leaders and judges which do not enforce the rule of law.

    China has criticized the United States by saying, “The United States’ tarnished human rights record has left it in no state — whether on a moral, political or legal basis — to act as the world’s ‘human rights justice.” China’s leaders cite the arrests of protesters in U.S.A. and that many protesters have accused the police in U.S.A. of brutality. Chinese leaders also say that the United States has “strict restrictions” on the Internet and that the U.S. Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act both have clauses that unlawfully authorize the government or law enforcement organizations in their acts—willfully violating the basic principles of democracy and the rule of law. It is most unfortunate, but the Chinese leaders are correct in their statements.

    So, how are we to speak to China’s leaders of their violations of human rights when our own leaders violate our “human rights?” And how can we convince Muslims that their “holy books” are not “holy” when our own leaders speak favorably of Islam? In fact, when our own leaders praise Islam, they also lie to us, and in fact they conspire with Islam’s lies to destroy all that our parents and grandparents sacrificed for future generations.

    The fact is that mankind will be constantly under the threats of Islam as long as Muslims and our leaders claim that the Qur’an and hadiths are “holy books”.

    Islam is not a religion, but a supranational state with its own constitution and legal system
    The truth is that Islam is not a “religion,” (i.e., that it does not fit the definition of the word “religion”), and that the leaders of Islam (imams and mullahs), are not “Muslims,” but dictatorial men wanting to enslave humanity. The Qur’an is their constitution and their Hadiths and Sharia law their legal system, a system which, in fact, permits Muslims to lie.
    NOTE: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt does not claim to be only a “religion,” but “a way of life,” i.e., a culture and nation based upon the acts and dictates of Mohammad seen in the Qur’an and Hadiths.
    At first glance Islam seems to be a “religion,” but upon close scrutiny you can see that Islam’s intent is only to conquer the cultures and religions of other nations. An effort to conquer all other nations has no relation to humanity, (i.e., human rights), morality nor spirittuality other than imprisonment, especially not when you look at the life of Mohammad (read Islam’s Hadiths) and see that all of his acts and teachings were about stealing, killing and conquering others. There is, in fact, no love nor “peace” in Islam, as Muslims claim. To the contrary Islam is a continual war (“jihad”) on “unbelievers” until it has succeeded in turning the world into one supranational Islamic state ruled by imams and mullahs. The definition of “religion” is as follows:
    Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values. Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature.
    The word religion is sometimes used interchangeably with faith or beliefsystem, but religion differs from private belief in that it has a public aspect. Many religions have organized behaviors, clergy, a definition of what constitutes adherence or membership, congregations of laity, regular meetings or services for the purposes of veneration of a deity or for prayer, holy places (either natural or architectural), and/or scriptures. The practice of a religion may also include sermons, commemoration of the activities of a god or gods, sacrifices, festivals, feasts, trance, initiations, funerary services, matrimonial services, meditation, music, art, dance, public service, or other aspects of human culture.
    The Qur’an says that Muslims must:
    “fight unbelievers until all religions belong to Islam,” (Qur’an 9:29), i.e., “until all religions are owned by one supranational Islamic state.”
    NOTE: After the nations of “unbelievers” are conquered the Qur’an requires the “unbelievers” to pay the “jizya” (a deliberately humiliating poll-tax — a higher tax than Muslims pay) and thus substantially contribute to the Islamic budget. In other words Islam’s intent is only to enslave, i.e,. a two class system where non-Muslims are enslaved and compelled to pay a higher tax.
    The fact that the Qur’an says that Muslims are to fight non-Muslims “until all religions belong to Islam” reveals that Islam, itself, is not a “religion,” but is only interested in controlling (owning) “all religions.” The Qur’an teaches that Islam is to be the owner of “all relgions.” This is also evidenced by the Qur’an’s requirement that after non-Islamic cultures are conquered non-Muslims must pay the higher tax. Obviously, the only goal of Islam is to conquer other nations, and this can even be seen in Saudi Arabia’s flag which features a sword. It is claimed that the sword represents “justice,” but the fact remains that the sword was from the onset used by Mohammad’s and his followers to steal, kill and conquer others. Saudi Arabia is at the heart of Islam, which was spread by the sword and lies. The sword is the compelling (persuasive) factor in Islam.
    The Saudi Arabian flag says, “There’s no God but Allah, and Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.” Obviously, Saudi Arabia has put its identity in Islam, but a claim that “Allah” is God and Mohammad his prophet does not make Islam a “religion”. One must look at the aims of Islam to decipher whether or not the claim is, in fact, a “religion”. So, let’s take a look at Islam’s objectives and modus operandi to spread itself throughout the world.
    To begin with, it is obvious that the sword and lies played an important role in the initial spread of Islam. This is very clearly seen in the Qur’an and hadiths, the hadiths being Islamic accounts of Mohammad’s life. And in reading the Qur’an and hadiths it is obvious that Mohammad used the sword and lies to compel all on the Arabian Peninsula to follow him.
    Although almost all “Muslims” say that there is “no compulsion in Islam,” the Qur’an and hadiths reveal that the very opposite is true, i.e., the Quran instructs Muslims to not befriend non-Muslims, instructs Muslims to lie to non-Mujslims and kill non-Muslims who in any way act to defend themselves or their nations from Islam. This is the “jihad” that is written of in the Qur’an and it is this “jihad” that Islam uses to spread Islam today—it is the modus operandi of Islam—compelling Muslims and non-Muslims with the sword and lies.
    NOTE: Muslims are also instructed by the Qur’an to kill apostates, i.e., those who leave Islam. Obviously, when “Muslims” are under the threat of death if they leave Islam, there is compulsion in Islam. The murder of apostates is also the root of the “honor killings” in Muslim families—where family members murder relatives because they fear the reprisals of other Muslims.
    Islam is threatening Western values.
    NOTE: Women are enslaved. In Saudi Arabia. A woman is not even allowed to exit the house without her husband or other male relative.
    In other words women and non-Muslims are tolerated only after they are enslaved. An Islamic state is a three class system: First Islamic men, second Islamic women and third non-Muslims. An Islamic state is a totalitarian state where the elite (an oligarchy of men) dictate. There is no freedom, no love, no truth in Islam. It is only a pattern of deceit to enslave the masses.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s