Here is a great video to watch and learn about the History of Islam. This is the first episode of the Jesus or Muhammad Show 2010 fall marathon. Host Samar Gorial and apologist/guest David Wood, Pastor Vance, Tom Trento (From The Florida Security Council) talk about THE SPREAD OF ISLAM and the nature of the beast we face. The show was live with Muslim and non-Muslim callers. I called in about halfway through the show with a few comments, and my favorite Islamophobe quote, but wished I would have asked a couple of probing questions instead. This topic has been covered over and over again at ABN and this show is educational and intriguing, as usual. To learn more about ABN, see our ABNsat.com PAGE HERE
You can see the FULL VIDEO HERE. Here is the opening show in 11 YouTubes
SORRY EVERYONE, they did not upload the 12th video so this last one leaves you hanging.
Kingdom of Heaven, a recent film set in the era of the Crusades, unfortunately perpetuates the false view that fanatical Christians brought war to an otherwise peaceful Muslim world. The film’s hero, Balian of Ibelin (played by Orlando Bloom) essentially represents a Hollywood version of what a Crusader should have been like: brave, concerned about the poor and underprivileged, tolerant, and not much interested in holy places in Jerusalem or in Christian doctrine—except to reject the extremism apparently caused by focusing on either one.
Real Crusaders were quite different, in that they were highly motivated by their Christian beliefs. By the late eleventh century, however, some of these beliefs had moved away from basic biblical and early church teachings. It was not their belief in absolute truth per se, but rather this mix of error with truth, along with the pressures of war, that led to some of the widely cited Crusader atrocities. Any proper attempt to evaluate the Crusades needs to measure their stated goals and actions against pertinent biblical criteria and the historical context at the time. Such an evaluation shows that the Crusades began with several noble and legitimate motives, but that these motives degenerated in practice at times. Even at their worst, however, the Crusades (only the first four are briefly considered) were little different than other wars conducted by Muslims before, during, and after the Crusades.
The recent film Kingdom of Heaven shows conflicts between Muslims and Christians in the twelfth century after the Second and before the Third Crusade, and dramatically culminates with the short siege and fall of Jerusalem to the Muslims in 1187. It is an amazing Hollywood version of the period, but it certainly is not factual history.
Among other things, it portrays Balian of Ibelin (played by Orlando Bloom) as a twenty-first-century, tolerant, sensitive hero who gained some kind of victory in the failed defense of Jerusalem, when, in fact, nearly all Christians at the time considered this loss to be a tremendous disaster.
More significantly, the film’s portrayal of Reynald of Chatillon, the French knight who controlled Karak castle and raided caravans that were going to Mecca, suggests that his actions were typical of most Crusaders who were trying to spread Christianity. The implication is that men like Reynald brought war to an otherwise peaceful, even idyllic, Muslim area. This cinematic image falls short of the truth in important ways, because wars were widespread throughout the Muslim world long before the Crusaders arrived and the Crusaders did not seek to convert Muslims by force.1
Such misconceptions, nevertheless, have contributed to the situation today in which “the Crusades” have become virtually synonymous with supposed Christian cruelty and intolerance. The Crusades actually were motivated in part by the desire of Christians in the West to help fellow Christians in the East. Those who went to the East suffered and often died in their attempts to help. Even if those attempts were misguided, unnecessary, or unsuccessful, there was little cruelty or intolerance in that aspect of the Crusades. Of course, the Crusades did involve warfare—often French, Norman, or other Christians against Turkish, Arab, or other Muslims—and that warfare brought death and destruction to all sides involved, as does war in any era. The Crusading era also included regrettable cases in which Christians and Muslims engaged in criminal, sinful, and wicked behavior apart from the fighting itself.
How can people begin to understand and evaluate this complex historical mix correctly? I believe that to conduct a proper evaluation of it, people should begin with the biblical and theological criteria for a legitimate war that were in use at the time, and then should consider whether the Crusades were conducted in harmony with such Christian teachings and with their own stated goals.
A JUST WAR?
Church fathers such as Ambrose and Augustine argued that such biblical texts as John 18:26; Romans 13:34; and 1 Peter 2:1314 provided justification for governments to use force, including war, as “an agent to bring punishment on the wrongdoer” (Rom. 13:4 NIV). These and other church leaders since the fourth century approved of Christians serving in the military and participating in war, at least under some circumstances, based on such passages as Matthew 8:57, Luke 3:14; 6:15; 14:31; and Acts 10 11. Various other views had existed among Christians, to be sure. The spectrum ranged from pacifism or nonresistance to offensive, preventive wars. By the time of the Crusades, however, many Christian writers and thinkers accepted a middle position in this spectrum, which was often called the just-war view. According to Augustine, this view argued that a war was legitimate if it (1) had a just cause (primarily that of defense); (2) had a just intention; (3) was a last resort; (4) was declared by a legal government or proper authority; (5) had limited objectives; (6) was fought with appropriate and proportionate means; and (7) ensured the protection of noncombatants and included proper treatment of the wounded and of prisoners.2 The first five criteria relate primarily to legitimate reasons for going to war in the first place while the last two provide standards for the proper conduct of those who are engaged in war. They can be applied fairly well to the stated motives for the Crusades and to the actual conduct of the Crusaders.
How did the world get from just Mohammad to well over 1 billion Muslims in the world? This is the question every Westerner should have to answer. These videos and additional references will help you do that.
While I feel this is the best video representation of the history of Islam I have seen yet, there are a few things that need correcting and highlighting, I will try to do that as we go along. I believe that if you watch these videos and this other very important video series, you will have a good grasp on the history of Islam. And if you absorb all the info in the links provided, you will be able to give a great 10 minutes summary of how this world got to where it is.
Here are two articles to put the broad context of Jihad into perspective.
This first video claims that Mohammad was “confused” when he first started receiving his revelations. the fact is the he thought he was demon possessed.
This next video shows that Islam’s neighboring civilizations where the Byzantine and the Persian empires. It should be noted that one reason the Muslims where successful in totally defeating the Persians and eventually successful in defeating the Byzantines (the eastern leg of the Roman Empire) was that the Byzantine and the Persian empires where in a weakened state from fighting each other when Islam exploded onto the scene.
The story of the Persian empire, in my opinion, is one of the strongest evidences that Islam is not a religion of peace and is bent on making all religion the religion of Allah. Persia is modern day Iran and how it became Muslim is very important because it shows the almost total annihilation of the religion Zoroastrianism at the hands of Islam. Zoroastrianism was the official religion of 3 successive Persian Empires and was one of the worlds largest religions when Islam was born but there are now less than 200,000 Zoroastrians in the world and less than 0.1 % of the Iranian population is Zoroastrian. In effect, the subjugation of Zoroastrianism by Islam has almost resulted in its extinction. Today Iranians barely remember that they where once Persian and Zoroastrian. AND THIS IS THE RELIGION OF NO RELIGIOUS COMPULSION?
To fill in an important gap in this video, before Muhammad invaded Mecca he had been raiding Meccan Merchant Caravans. There was some important battles that happened before Muhammad invaded mecca. This video also mentions the apostasy, it should be noted that at this time Caliph Abu Bahker standardized his version of the Koran and burned all the opposing text, so do Muslims really have the words of Muhammad?
This video may also prompt you to learn more about Jizya and Dhimmitude because it falsely claims that the treatment of Non-Muslims by Muslims was “oppressive by modern standards but tolerant by medieval standards”. BUT THIS IS NOT TRUE. Non-Muslims where not allowed to even maintain there places of worship, to openly practice their religion, or teach it to their children. Overall the system of subjugation almost ensures the subjugated religions will nearly vanish as did the Zoroastrians. No other religion has a systematized program of subjugation written into a legal code, instead all other religions have at least some form of the golden rule and are truly pluralistic.
The War between Christianity and Islam. There is just so much that could be said about this that is not said in the video that I suggest you read some of the articles and view some of the videos from the Christianity peace/conquest category about the Crusades and learn the real reason and purpose of the crusades. If I’ve learned anything studying Islam it is that PEOPLE NEED TO STOP APOLOGIZING FOR THE CRUSADES. The whole ordeal infuriates me so I will just say “LEARN ABOUT ISLAM or learn to say “Allāhu Akbar” (Allah is [the] Greatest)”. There is no other option.
BE PROUD OF OUR WESTERN CIVILIZATION for a change, damn-it – or go learn Arabic. If it where not for the crusaders, we would all be Muslim, subjugated or put to death by now!!! I, for one, THANK GOD for the Christians who said….
……..OR TWO, OR THREE, OR HOWEVER MANY IT TAKES.
ThIS video states that when the crusaders arrived in the foreign lands they where “amazed to find an Islam society that was vastly superior to European culture”. Some clarification is in need here. The Muslims push the idea of the conquered Spanish civilization as being an advanced society. But reality is that it was not advanced because of Islam but in-spite of Islam. Like the conquered Istanbul (Byzantine Constantinople), Spain was the product of the Dhimmi, not Muslims. The Christian societies where already far advanced compared to Arabian culture from which Islam came. Islam conquering these lands always resulted in a cannibalizing of the conquered cultures and additional advancements come from the Dhimmis, not the Muslims. And once the Dhimmis are subjugated to insignificance and the numbers are greatly reduced the result is a backslide of the culture to the 7th century Arabian culture from which islam came, which has not really contributed anything significant to modern society, even though Muslims may say otherwise. LOOK INTO IT.
These two videos do a good job on the decline of Islam. But one point that is not covered is the genocide of the Assyrians. Another important point is not covered is the Young Turk Revolution and the over throw of the Caliphate.
SOURCE: In our time, there is much conversation and commotion about the Crusades. There are two reasons for this.
First and foremost is the Crusades are a “bone in the throat” to Islam. Muslims continue to blame all Christianity for these Holy wars that the Roman Catholic Church commissioned to retake the “Holy Land” from Islam.
Second, many western Christians and non-Christians follow the same Islamic idea that the Crusades were only for bloodthirsty plunder by poor “Christian” adventurers. Some were that but Crusade leaders were not.
In the USA, often this is anti-Catholic sentiment has been generated and repeated by “Christians” with anti-Catholic sentiments.
Strangely, even the Roman Catholic Church has adopted this myth to chastise itself. Its’ Pope has publicly apologized to all Islam for the Crusades. Why and why now?
Philip Jenkins in his book on the coming of Global Christianity, (The Next Christendom, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2002, pp 24,24), writes:
“In recent years, a powerful social movement has demanded that the West, and specifically the churches, apologize for the medieval crusading movement. In this view, the Crusades represented aggression, pure and simple, against the Muslim world, and nobody can deny the resulting wars involved their share of atrocities. Underlying the movement for apology, though, is the assumption that religious frontiers are somehow carved in stone, and that Muslim states of the Near East must always and infallibly have been destined to be part of the world of Islam. An equally good case can be made that the medieval Middle East was no more inevitably Muslim than other regions conquered by Islam and subsequently liberated, like Spain and Hungry.
“Nor, curiously, do Westerners suggest that Muslims apologize for the aggressive acts that gave them power over those various lands in the first place. Westerners have simply forgotten the [brutalization and conquest of these] once great Christian communities of the Eastern World.”
(Ed. Note: Muslims never apologize for anything. They claim all their acts are by Allah’s will and direction through Muhammad as recorded in the Qur’an/Koran. So, for them, no apologies are due for the 9/11World Trade Center bombing or anything else.)
The fact is that the Crusades were a “jihad” in reverse is easily proved by early Christian History. Muslims insist that Christians willingly converted to Islam. Three indisputable facts contradict that claim.
1. For the first 300 years of Christianity. the followers of Jesus would accept torture and death from the Roman Empire rather than forsake their commitment to Jesus. They believed any revocation of their declared faith would earn them a ticket into Hell. There is no reason they would have willingly changed their faith from Jesus to Muhammad except by force. Islam does not promise paradise for believers, as does Christianity. Even Muhammad said he did not know his final reward. That would only be determined on his judgment day.
2. Next, Islam had conquered Spain in addition to North Africa and the Middle East. When the Moors attempted to extend their empire into Europe, they were met at Tours by Charles Martel and were soundly defeated. From that point forward, Islam was pushed out of Spain. So, if Christians willingly converted to Islam, why did they resist it at Tours and push it out of Europe?
3. Christians never would have willingly given up their “holy” cities of Jerusalem and Alexandria.
* * * * * * * *
The following is a excerpt from an article in Crisis Magazine. Credit is given at its end.
* * * * * * * *
“So what is the truth about the Crusades? Scholars are still working some of that out. But much can already be said with certainty. For starters, the Crusades to the East were in every way defensive wars. They were a direct response to Muslim aggression–an attempt to turn back or defend against Muslim conquests of Christian lands.
“Christians in the eleventh century were not paranoid fanatics. Muslims really were gunning for them. While Muslims can be peaceful, Islam was born in war and grew the same way. From the time of Mohammed, the means of Muslim expansion was always the sword. Muslim thought divides the world into two spheres, the Abode of Islam and the Abode of War. Christianity–and for that matter any other non-Muslim religion–has no abode. Christians and Jews can be tolerated within a Muslim state under Muslim rule. But, in traditional Islam, Christian and Jewish states must be destroyed and their lands conquered. When Mohammed was waging war against Mecca in the seventh century, Christianity was the dominant religion of power and wealth. As the faith of the Roman Empire, it spanned the entire Mediterranean, including the Middle East, where it was born. The Christian world, therefore, was a prime target for the earliest caliphs, and it would remain so for Muslim leaders for the next thousand years.
“With enormous energy, the warriors of Islam struck out against the Christians shortly after Mohammed’s death. They were extremely successful. Palestine, Syria, and Egypt–once the most heavily Christian areas in the world–quickly succumbed. By the eighth century, Muslim armies had conquered all of Christian North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of Western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East.
“That is what gave birth to the Crusades. They were not the brainchild of an ambitious pope or rapacious knights but a response to more than four centuries of conquests in which Muslims had already captured two-thirds of the old Christian world. At some point, Christianity as a faith and a culture had to defend itself or be consumed by Islam. The Crusades were that defense.
“Pope Urban II called upon the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war. Why did they do it? The answer to that question has been badly misunderstood. In the wake of the Enlightenment, it was usually asserted that Crusaders were merely lacklands and ne’er-do-wells who took advantage of an opportunity to rob and pillage in a faraway land. The Crusaders’ expressed sentiments of piety, self-sacrifice, and love for God were obviously not to be taken seriously. They were not just a front for darker designs.
“During the past two decades, computer-assisted charter studies have demolished that contrivance. Scholars have discovered that crusading knights were generally wealthy men with plenty of their own land in Europe. Nevertheless, they willingly gave up everything to undertake the holy mission. Crusading was not cheap. Even wealthy lords could easily impoverish themselves and their families by joining a Crusade. They did so not because they expected material wealth (which many of them had already) but because they hoped to “store up treasure where rust and moth could not corrupt.” They were keenly aware of their sinfulness and eager to undertake the hardships of the Crusade as a penitential act of charity and love.
“Europe is littered with thousands of medieval charters attesting to these sentiments, charters in which these men still speak to us today if we will listen. Of course, they were not opposed to capturing booty if it could be had. But the truth is that the Crusades were notoriously bad for plunder. A few people got rich, but the vast majority returned with nothing.”
Arsalan Iftikhar is an international human rights lawyer and former National Legal Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (the organization named by U.S. Federal prosecutors in 2007 as an un-indicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case involving the Holy Land Foundation).[1] He is a contributing author of an award-winning book[2] and is well-known for his interviews, commentaries and analyses which have regularly appeared in virtually every major media outlet in the world.
In this article we will analyse a piece he had written for CNN, titled “Murder has no religion”. It was written in response to the Fort Hood massacre, in which the “Allahu Akbar” screaming[3] U.S. Army major, Nidal Malik Hasan, murdered 13 people and wounded 30 others at a US military installation.[4]
ANALYSIS
Most of the world’s 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy Quran states quite clearly that, “Anyone who kills a human being … it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind. … If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all of mankind.”[5]
No, it is not clear at all. It is unfortunate that even his opening sentence is a mistruth. There is no such verse in the Qur’an. What Iftikhar has presented us with is a butchered and out-of-context paraphrasing of Qur’an 5:32 meant to mislead those who have little knowledge of Islamic scripture.
This verse is examined in detail here. In summary; it is written in past tense, and clearly does not apply to Muslims but to “the Children of Israel” i.e. the Jews. When the clause (omitted from the verse by Iftikhar) which allows killing is reinserted and we read it in context with the next two verses, it is in actual fact a chilling warning to non-believers who cause “mischief” in the land.
Accordingly, it should come as little surprise to any reasonable observer that when Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan recently committed his shocking acts of mass murder at Fort Hood, Texas, America’s Muslim community of over 7 million felt an added sense of horror and sadness at this senseless attack against the brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces.[5]
Another mistruth. Contrary to the bloated figures provided by CAIR, and accepted by many apologists, media outlets, and even the President of the United States, and in spite of the massive influx of Muslim refugees, a Pew survey carried-out in October, 2009 found there are only 2.454 million Muslims in the U.S.[6] Percentage-wise, Islam represents a minuscule 0.8 percent of the United States religious make-up.
Quite possibly the message he was trying to convey to us was that there are many Muslims in America yet there are so few terrorist attacks on American soil. Unfortunately this is not the case. There have been several terror attacks in the U.S. since 9/11 and countless foiled attempts.[7]
Furthermore, the relative silence among America’s Muslim community and the worlds Muslim population in general suggests a passive acceptance of violence perpetuated in the name of Islam. There is no way he could possibly know how America’s Muslims felt in regards to the senseless deaths of innocent civilians at the hands of this Muslim terrorist, and his empty words are meant to pull at America’s heart strings.
True to form, many conservative media pundits wasted little time in pointing to reports that Hasan had said “Allahu Akbar” (Arabic for “God is great”) at the start of his murderous rampage. News coverage continuously showed the looping convenience store black-and-white videotape footage of Hasan wearing traditional white Islamic garb.[5]
Another mistruth. The Arabic word kebir means “great,” while akbar means “greater”. These two words are not interchangeable.[8] For evidence of this, we need only look to Qur’an 2:219 which uses both words. The word for “God” in Arabic is “Ilah” not “Allah“, as evidenced in the Shahada.
Therefore we can rightly conclude that “Allahu akbar” does not mean “God is great”, but “Allah is greater“. This is the traditional war cry of Jihadists and was used by Muhammad himself before he launched his attack on the Jews of Khaibar.[8]
And there is no reason why the media should be criticized for reporting the words of a terrorist before his murderous rampage, and there is no reason why video footage of the terrorist in question should be suppressed.
Does Arsalan Iftikhar wish to inhibit reporting on certain criminals based on their own choice to overtly parade their religious affiliation?
Muslims who label themselves as “moderate” need to become assertive against their co-religionists which they refer to as “extremists,” rather than attempt to hide religious extremism from the eyes of non-Muslims by sweeping matters under the carpet.
I’d like you to watch this 23-minute video to see how Islamic media deals with the Jews when it’s not even minimally constrained by having to operate within a Western country. These clips, compiled by the Middle East Media Research Institute, come from various Arab television stations. (If you can’t see the video, the link is here.)
They are sickening, especially so when children are made to parrot the hatreds of their elders. The old saw that Jews mix the blood of goyim into their Passover matzos is given big play (has anyone ever wondered why those matzos never seem to be red?), and even the Holocaust is justified with glee. Peter Singer’s expanding circle of morality seems to have missed some parts of the world.
Can anyone believe that even a two-state solution in the Middle East will quell this virulent anti-Semitism? Several announcers in fact state that wouldn’t happen. As Anthony Grayling has stressed, this is how religion behaves when it’s not on the back foot.
“The true Islamic concept of peace goes something like this: “Peace comes through submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah” (i.e. Islam). As such the Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war. It was inevitable and unavoidable that the conflict would eventually reach our borders, and so it has.” Vernon Richards
SOURCE: Islam is a religion of peace. Peace and tolerance. Just ask any of its adherents.
Keep that in mind while reading the following stories.
First up, remember Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani? She’s the Iranian woman who has been convicted of adultery. And in Iran, the penalty for adultery isn’t a divorce or a reality show or a photoshoot — it’s death by stoning.
Because that’s what the Koran specifies. Adulterers shall be stoned to death. And it lays out precisely how the stoning is to be carried out. Here is Islamic justice.
To sum it up: you are bound and wrapped in a burial shroud. Then you are buried in the ground — men up to their waists, women to their necks. Finally, the crowd pelts you with rocks (not too big as to kill quickly, not too small as to just annoy — orange-sized is about right) until you are pronounced dead. If you manage to work yourself free, you’re spared. This is slightly easier for men, who aren’t as buried as deeply and have greater upper body strength, but it’s still damned hard. (Hey, here’s a stunt for David Copperfield or Kriss Angel!)
Remember, Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.
Next up, we have a case in Pakistan where a Christian woman is accused of blaspheming and insulting Islam. She’s had a long feud with a Muslim neighbor, and apparently in the course of the fighting said something bad about Islam. She denies it, but in Islamic law grants greater weight to the word of a Muslim. So she has been convicted and sentenced to death.
There is a bit of international pressure to let her go, perhaps even let her leave the country. But that is unacceptable to the adherents to the Religion of Peace there. They want to see her hanged.
They held rallies to demand “justice,” shouting that “We are ready to sacrifice our life for the Prophet Muhammad.” Of course, what they are demanding is that the government sacrifice this Christian woman’s life, but don’t confuse them with facts. They’re too busy practicing the peace and tolerance that Islam is renowned for.
After all, Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance.
Finally, a little bit of Shariah law at home. In Connecticut, a roller rink has a rule for safety: no loose head coverings on the rink. They’re a safety hazard — if they come loose, they can snarl the wheels of others and cause them to fall. So you either lose the head covering, or they’ll loan you a helmet to keep it in place. Simple common sense.
But common sense has no place in Islam. A Muslim woman went there and, when confronted with the policy, denounced it as racist and discriminatory and hateful. Allah demands that she wear a scarf to cover her hair, and the will of Allah will keep it secured to her head while she’s whizzing around the rink. And should she fall and it come loose and send other skaters tumbling, then that’s the will of Allah, too.
So there’s a little bit of news from the world of Islam. Remember, Islam is a religion of peace.
Exposing The Dangers of Islam and The Koran. ISLAM = The Religion Of Conquest
ISLAM’S GOAL IN A NUTSHELL
Qur’an: 9:39 – “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).”
Bukhari 8:387 – “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’
The Koran tells us the purpose of Islam…
Qur’an: 48:28 "He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may cause it to prevail over all religion. And Allah sufficeth as a Witness."
Qur’an: 61:9 - "He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse."
A List Of All Damon’s Websites
Christian Cult Apologetics, Islam Exposure, Police Advocacy, Original Poetry and Songs
THE CONCEPT OF ISLAMOPHOBIA IS USED TO SILENCE ISSUES RELATING TO ISLAM.
"These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, 'that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise'." Thomas Jefferson to the Continental Congress about the brutal pirate attacks of the Muslim Ottoman Barbary States which prompted the first two wars of the newly independent United States of America, - the Barbary Wars. (1801–1805 and 1815)
Mahomet established a religion by putting his enemies to death; Jesus Christ by commanding his followers to lay down their lives. Blaise Pascal
"I am afraid that God has sent these men to lay waste the world". Gregory Palamus of Thessalonica, 1354: While negotiating the surrender of Alexandria to the Muslims.
“Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled and incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of [other] countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world. But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world…. Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until they are devoured by [the unbelievers] Islam says Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us Islam says Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender to the enemy Islam says Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to Paradise, which can be opened only for Holy Warriors! There are hundreds of other [Koranic] verses and Hadiths [sayings of the Prophet] urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.” Ayatollah Khomeini 1942.
“During the thousand years that included the careers of the Frankish soldier and the Polish king, the Christians of Asia and Africa proved unable to wage successful war with the Moslem conquerors; and in consequence Christianity practically vanished from the two continents; and today nobody can find in them any "social values" whatever, in the sense in which we use the words, so far as the sphere of Mohammedan influence. There are such "social values" today in Europe, America, and Australia only because during those thousand years the Christians of Europe possessed the warlike power to do what the Christians of Asia and Africa had failed to do - that is, to beat back the Moslem invader.” Theodore Roosevelt.
"The precept of the Koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force". John Quincy Adams: written in 1829
"Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it...have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind". John Wesley (1703-91)
In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar, the Egyptian, combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural energy of a fanatic, and the fraudulent spirit of an impostor, proclaimed himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion over an extensive portion of the earth. Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust, by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST: TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.
The precept of the koran is, perpetual war against all who deny, that Mahomet is the prophet of God. The vanquished may purchase their lives, by the payment of tribute; the victorious may be appeased by a false and delusive promise of peace; and the faithful follower of the prophet, may submit to the imperious necessities of defeat: but the command to propagate the Moslem creed by the sword is always obligatory, when it can be made effective. The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force. John Quincy Adams
Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book [the Quran] forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it. Ben Franklin
"Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralysis the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Muhammadanism is a militant and proselytizing faith." - Winston Churchill
"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, lovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.
The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome." WINSTON CHURCHILL ON ISLAM - IN 1899!
"The true Islamic concept of peace goes something like this: "Peace comes through submission to Muhammad and his concept of Allah" (i.e. Islam). As such the Islamic concept of peace, meaning making the whole world Muslim, is actually a mandate for war. It was inevitable and unavoidable that the conflict would eventually reach our borders, and so it has." Vernon Richards
"Among religions, Bolshevism is to be reckoned with Muhammadanism rather than with Christianity and Buddhism, Christianity and Buddhism are primarily personal religions, with mystical doctrines and a love of contemplation. Muhammadanism and Bolshevism are practical, social, unspiritual (doctrines), concerned to win the empire of this world." - Professor Bertrand Russell (Philosopher)
"Muslims are the first victims of Islam. Many times I have observed in my travels that fanaticism comes from a small number of dangerous men who maintain others in the practice of this religion by terror. To liberate the Muslim from his religion is the best service that one can render him". - Earnest Renan (French Thinker)
"The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex of order and freedom, culture and peace, can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within." - Will Durant (U.S. Historian)
"Muhammadanism fell far short. In this case the projections were of violence predominating. Love and kinship were secondary to what indeed amounted to baptism and communion through violence and blood...
...So the concept of God began to change as the ego recognized its reliance upon inner reality, but the drama had to be worked out within the current framework. Muhammadanism was basically so violent precisely because Christianity was basically so gentle. Not that Christianity was not mixed with violence, or that Muhammadanism was devoid of love. But the psyche went through its developments and battled with itself, denying some feelings and characteristics and stressing others, so the historic religious exterior dramas represented and followed these inner aspirations, struggles, and searches." - Jane Roberts, Seth (20th Century Spiritualism)
“Having thus given a cursory view of the Qur'an, I lay it before the sensible persons with the purpose that they should know what kind of book the Qur'an is. If they ask me, I have no hesitation to say that it can not be the work either of God or of a learned man, nor can it be a book of knowledge. Here its very vital defect has been exposed with the object that the people may not waste their life falling into its imposition…
... The Qur'an is the result of ignorance, the source of animalization of human being, a fruitful cause of destroying peace, an incentive to war, a propagator of hostility among men and a promoter of suffering in society. As to defect of repetition, the Qur'an is its store.” - Maharishi Swami Dayanand Saraswati (19th Century Indian Sage and Rational Reformer)
"Over a billion people believe in Allah without truly knowing what Allah supposedly stands for or what he really demands of them. And the minority that do understand continue to be Moslems because they have redefined their morality and ethics to fit within the teachings of Islam, which are floridly lacking in morality. They therefore redefine what is good and evil in order to fit their lives into what is preached by Islam, instead of examining Islam to see if it fits within the good life. Backwards thinking, imposed by a backward religion". - Professor Bertrand Russell
"Show me just what Prophet Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Pope Benedict/Byzantine Emperor Paleogus
“The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.” – Albert Einstein
Here is a great video to watch and learn about the History of Islam. This is the first episode of the Jesus or Muhammad Show 2010 fall marathon. Host Samar Gorial and apologist/guest David Wood, Pastor Vance, Tom Trento (From The Florida Security Council) talk about THE SPREAD OF ISLAM and the nature of the beast we face. The show was live with Muslim and non-Muslim callers. I called in about halfway through the show with a few comments, and my favorite Islamophobe quote, but wished I would have asked a couple of probing questions instead. This topic has been covered over and over again at ABN and this show is educational and intriguing, as usual. To learn more about ABN, see our ABNsat.com PAGE HERE
