Monday, September 18, 2006

23 Questions RE; Islam


23 Questions---From The On-Line "American Thinker" Of September 18, 2006

What matters now is not press reports about pieces of a German lecture by Benedict or the Musllim reaction. If we must answer “yes” to all, or any, of the following 23 questions about Islam, are we entitled, nay bound, to be very concerned indeed ?

1. Does Islam claim that every single word in the 6,234 verses of its Quran was not merely divinely inspired, or authorised, but actually dictated, in Arabic, directly by Allah Himself, and revealed over 22 years from 610 CE, and so is uncorrupted and unalterable ? It descended [nuzila] ready-made and complete from heaven.

2. Does Islam hold the “Principle of Abrogation” – Nasikh - [Quran 2:106] whereby later verses always over-ride and replace or cancel the earlier ?

3. Are the 14 later [Medina] chapters and over 1,600 verses in the Quran, from 622 CE to 632 CE, thus supreme and unchallengeable when they contradict the earlier Mecca ones ?

4. Are there some 164 later Medina verses [from 24 Surah, between Surah 2 and 76] favouring violent Jihad, Jihad Bis Saif, by the sword, or Holy War [Qital Fi Sabilillah], not merely Jihad-e-nafs or struggle against desires ? See list, and full texts, on, including 9:5 “slay the idolaters whereever you find them and take them captive”. And see for 10 different English translations of any verse.

5. Are there many later Medina verses like 5:82 [“the most implacable in their enmity to the faithful are the Jews”] teaching utter hatred for Jews, as 24 Surah and nearly 90 verses translated into English on the Jewishvirtuallibrary web-site, or 20 references in the Fatwa Database from Sheik As-Salam Alaykum on the Islam On-line site, indicate?

6. Does the Quran allow, or even command, the killing of Apostates who leave Islam, like Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali ?

7. Likewise for Blasphemers – like Salman Rushdie?

8. And of Infidels in extending, or restoring, the rule of Islam?

9. And of Gays?

10. Does the Quran provide for hand amputation for thieves, as in 5:38 ?11. For flogging?

12. For public beheading?

13. For beating wives, as in 4:34?

14. And are there many Hadith which show the Prophet ordered stonings [introduced under the Second Caliph, 634-644 CE, ‘Umar, a Companion of the Prophet’]?

15. Does the Quran demand the eventual Global Rule of Islam, with no secular realm, whereas Judaism is about waiting for their Messiah, and Christianity offers salvation to persons everywhere?

16. Does the Quran demand the ultimate enforcement of Sharia Law everywhere, even on us Infidels?

17. Does the Quran permit Freedom of Worship to all faiths?

18. Or Free Speech?

19. Or the Right of Free Organisation?

20. Does it treat women as inferiors not only regarding inheritance, but as witnesses?

21. Does the Quran command Muslims to never surrender any land once held by them, such as Spain, or Western Palestine/Israel?

22. Did their “Prophet” order or lead 74 raids or wars during his Medina decade from 622 CE to his 632 CE death?

23. Were 600-900 male Jewish prisoners beheaded in March 627 CE [see Surah 33:25-26]?

If the clear honest answer is “yes” to all, or even to any, of these 23 questions, how can Islam [as distinct from other Faiths] be compatibile with either the 1945 UN Declaration of Human Rights, or the US Constitution? And how can we democrats not fear both any such system, and any who seriously adhere to it, and their increasing number in our midst?

We do not [yet] live in Dar al-Islam, the Realm of Submission, which is exactly what the word “Islam” means, that territory where the population have either become ‘submitters’ [muslimun] or else ‘dhimmis’, submitting by paying the Jizya tax, and accepting Muslim Rule. We by contrast, still live in Dar al-Harb, the Realm of War, the territory where all, or most, of the population have not yet submitted, and who must be made to, by force.

Those who argue that Islam was not spread by the Sword because conversion was not encouraged in the early period, totally miss the point that the territory had been captured by force and the population made ‘dhimmis’.

Are we now to condemn “Western Imperialism” but are not allowed to even mention Islamic Imperialism?

Let us have precise answers to such vital questions of principle, not emotive denounciations and abuse. What is the real answer to each of those 23 points ? And what reasonable person or society should tolerate, or surrender under, any “Dont call us violent, or we’ll kill you” threats, from any quarter?

Tom Carew, Dublin, Ireland 9 18 06

Sunday, September 17, 2006

The Bill Is Now Due From Muslim Males

About 1400-years ago an Arab (Named Mohammed) founded an ideology now called Islam. As part of that foundation he established a principle that any “insult” to him or Islam or its handbook, the Koran, was worthy of death as a punishment. He also established the revenge reaction to make any attack, justified by the facts/justice/equity or otherwise a sufficient basis for a like OR greater counter-attack.

The latest example of the implementation of those principles is the murder of an Italian Nun and attacks on two Christian church buildings after Pope Benedict-XVI quoted a very long dead Greek ruler as to the fact that Islam had spread itself “by the sword”. (That is as true today in such places as the Sudan as it was in the Middle East of so long ago!)

For the above murder and attacks on Christian places-of-worship and for 1400-years of like crimes THE BILL IS NOW DUE!

Each and every adult Muslim male (Who has not publicly rejected the noted teachings of Mohammed) is a part of Islam and is responsible for those crimes by either his direct action or by indirectly supporting them through financial means or just plain indifference. That bill may AND should be presented to any such adult Muslim male. (Women have little, if any say, is the operations of Islam and are, therefore, excused from paying such debts. Justice prevents the presentation of such charges against children.)

Since Muslims are great believers in collective life and responsibility, they should have no problem in paying the just debts of members of the community of all believers in the ideology of Islam-Especially as the criminals noted above hide themselves among the crowd of such believers and can, by historical and current-events proofs, expect protection from other Muslims.

The charges below do NOT reflect any sense of revenge or retribution. They are just and equitable charges; But, those which DO involve some interest and surcharges based on the crime of supporting Islam and all of its horrid works—In this age and for the last 1400-years..


1.For every Non-Muslim murdered by a Muslim (Acting in the name of Islam), two adult Muslim males are to be killed as quickly as possible.
2.For every Non-Muslim maimed by a Muslim (In the name of Islam), two adult
Muslim males are to suffer the same injuries.
3.For every Non-Muslim place-of-worship attacked by Muslims (In the name of Islam),
two Mosques or like places are to be destroyed.
4.Other and like Islamic crimes are to be punished on a like schedules of repayments.

Saturday, September 16, 2006

Anonymous Comments

Those persons who post anonymous comments to my blog entries are moral, intellectual and, most likely, physical cowards---Of the same variety as murder innocent women, children and men by use of rockets launched from civilian homes and towards such places of peaceful assembly as markets and playgrounds.

Letter To The Pope RE: Islam

Pope Benedict-XVI has been attacked for bringing up only one of the "problems" with or "faults" of Islam---Its position that the use of force is allowed to spread its ideology throughout the world. Below, you will find a letter sent to him in defense of his position AND noting that he did not fully support the truth as to the teachings of Mohammed.

2321 South 82nd Street
West Allis
Wisconsin, USA

Dearest Holy Father:

If there is anyone in this world-and-time who can be expected to NOT lie ("Bear false witness") about others it is you. When you, too gently, raised the issue of Islam's well documented history (To this day in such places as the Sudan) of spreading its ideology by war you were only being truthful.

You should have added that Islam is NOT "a religion of peace"; But, is an ideology with basic teachings which support murder, rape, revenge, robbery, genocide and the destruction of real religions and cultures.

Let the Muslims raise up one voice in apologizing for their, well documented, practices of horror and terror which they have AND are inflicting on the world. We Christians have expressed our regrets for the misconduct of those very, VERY, few Crusaders (Who waited through 300-years of Islamic aggression before responding in self-defense) who violated Christian principles in their efforts to destroy that enemy of humanity---Islam.

Respectfully submitted in +,
James Pawlak