Islam: The Greatest Murder Machine in History

Konrad, Mike.  "The Greatest Murder Machine in History."  The American Spectator. 31 May 2014.  http://americanthinker.com/2014/05/the_greatest_murder_machine_in_history.html.  Accessed 31 May 2014.

May 31, 2014

The Greatest Murder Machine in History

By Mike Konrad

When one thinks of mass murder, Hitler comes to mind. If not Hitler, then Tojo, Stalin, or Mao. Credit is given to the 20th-century totalitarians as the worst species of tyranny to have ever arisen. However, the alarming truth is that Islam has killed more than any of these, and may surpass all of them combined in numbers and cruelty.

The enormity of the slaughters of the "religion of peace" are so far beyond comprehension that even honest historians overlook the scale. When one looks beyond our myopic focus, Islam is the greatest killing machine in the history of mankind, bar none.

The Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. -- Will Durant, as quoted on Daniel Pipes site.

Conservative estimates place the number at 80 million dead Indians.

According to some calculations, the Indian (subcontinent) population decreased by 80 million between 1000 (conquest of Afghanistan) and 1525 (end of Delhi Sultanate). -- Koenrad Elst as quoted on Daniel Pipes site

80 Million?! The conquistadors' crimes pale into insignificance at that number. No wonder Hitler admired Islam as a fighting religion. He stood in awe of Islam, whose butchery even he did not surpass.

Over 110 Million Blacks were killed by Islam.

... a minumum of 28 Million African were enslaved in the Muslim Middle East.  Since, at least, 80 percent of those captured by Muslim slave traders were calculated to have died before reaching the slave market, it is believed that the death toll from 1400 years of Arab and Muslim slave raids into Africa could have been as high as 112 Millions.  When added to the number of those sold in the slave markets, the total number of African victims of the trans-Saharan and East African slave trade could be significantly higher than 140 Million people. -- John Allembillah Azumah, author of The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa: A Quest for Inter-religious Dialogue

Add just those two numbers alone together, and Islam has surpassed the victims of 20th-century totalitarianism. However, it does not end there. Add the millions who died at the hand of Muslims in the Sudan in our lifetime.

Much of Islamic slavery was sexual in nature, with a preference for women. Those men who were captured were castrated. The mulatto children of the women were often killed, which explains why Islam was not demographically shifted towards the black race, unlike slaves in the West, who bore children to breed a mestizo class. Add in those dead children; and we arrive at well over 200 million.

Remember that in the 7th century, North Africa was almost totally Christian. What happened to them? 

By the year 750, a hundred years after the conquest of Jerusalem, at least 50 percent of the world's Christians found themselves under Muslim hegemony… Today there is no indigenous Christianity in the region [of Northwest Africa], no communities of Christians whose history can be traced to antiquity.-- "Christianity Face to Face with Islam," CERC

What happened to those Christian millions? Some converted. The rest?  Lost to history.

We know that over 1 million Europeans were enslaved by Barbary Pirates. How many died is anybody's guess.

...for the 250 years between 1530 and 1780, the figure could easily have been as high as 1,250,000 -  BBC

In the Middle Ages…

…many slaves were passed through Armenia and were castrated there to fill the Muslim demand for eunuchs. -- Slavery in Early Medieval Europe.

The same practice ran through Islamic Spain. North Europeans captured from raids up to Iceland, or purchased, were butchered in the castratoriums of Iberia. Many died from the operations that ran for centuries.

The number of dead from the Muslim conquest of the Balkans and Southern Italy is unknown, but again the numbers add up, surely into the millions over the centuries. Don't forget the 1.5 million Armenian Christians killed by the Turks during WWI. We do know that over five centuries, vast numbers of Christian boys were kidnapped to become Islamic Janissary mercenaries for the Turks. Add those in, too.

Muslims prized blonde women for their harems; and so enslaved Slavic women were purchased in the bazaars of the Crimean Caliphate. In Muslim Spain, an annual tribute of 100 Visigothic [blonde] women was required from Spain's Cantabrian coast.

For decades, 100 virgins per year were required by the Muslim rulers of Spain from the conquered population.  The tribute was only stopped when the Spaniards began fighting back -- Jihad: Islam's 1,300 Year War Against Western Civilisation

Add in the death toll from the Reconquista and the numbers climb higher. 

Research has shown that the Dark Ages were not caused by the Goths, who eventually assimilated and Christianized:    

…the real destroyers of classical civilization were the Muslims. It was the Arab Invasions... which broke the unity of the Mediterranean world and turned the Middle Sea -- previously one of the world’s most important trading highways -- into a battleground. It was only after the appearance of Islam... that the cities of the West, which depended upon the Mediterranean trade for their survival, began to die. -- Islam Caused the Dark Ages

Add in those unknown millions who died as a consequence.

How many know the horrors of the conquest of Malaysia? The Buddhists of Thailand and Malaysia were slaughtered en masse.

When attacked and massacred by the Muslims, the Buddhists initially did not make any attempt to escape from their murderers. They accepted death with an air of fatalism and destiny. And hence they are not around today to tell their story. – History of Jihad.org

We may never know the numbers of dead.

After Muslims came to power in the early 15th century, animist hill peoples eventually disappeared due to their enslavement and ‘incorporation’ into the Muslim population of Malaya, Sumatra, Borneo, and Java via raids, tribute and purchase, especially of children. Java was the largest exporter of slaves around 1500. -- Islam Monitor

In the same manner, Islam arrived in the Philippines. Only the appearance of the Spanish stopped a total collapse, and confined Islam to the southern islands. 

The coming of the Spanish saved the Philippines from Islam, except for the Southern tip where the population had been converted to Islam.-- History of Jihad.org

Again, the number of dead is unknown; but add them to the total.

The animist Filipinos were eager to ally with the Spanish against Islam. In fact, much of Southeast Asia welcomed the Spanish and Portuguese as preferable to Islam. 

...from the 17th century successive Thai kings allied themselves with the seafaring Western powers – the Portuguese and the Dutch and succeeded in staving off the threat of Islam from the Muslim Malays and their Arab overlords.-- History of Jihad.org  

A few galleons and muskets were not enough to conquer Asia. Islam had made the Europeans initially appear as liberators; and to a certain extent they were. Who were the real imperialists?

Even today...

...Malaysian Jihadis are plotting to transform multi-ethnic Malaysia into an Islamic Caliphate, and fomenting trouble in Southern Thailand.-- History of Jihad.org

Add this all up. The African victims. The Indian victims. The European victims. Add in the Armenian genocide. Then add in the lesser known, but no doubt quite large number of victims of Eastern Asia. Add in the jihad committed by Muslims against China, which was invaded in 651 AD. Add in the Crimean Khanate predations on the Slavs, especially their women.

Though the numbers are not clear, what is obvious is that Islam is the greatest murder machine in history bar none, possibly exceeding 250 million dead. Possibly one-third to one-half or more of all those killed by war or slavery in history can be traced to Islam; and this is just a cursory examination.

Now consider the over 125 Million women today who have been genitally mutilated for Islamic honor's sake. In spite of what apologists tell you, the practice is almost totally confined to Islamic areas. 

New information from Iraqi Kurdistan raises the possibility that the problem is more prevalent in the Middle East than previously believed and that FGM is far more tied to religion than many Western academics and activists admit. – “Is Female Genital Mutilation an Islamic Problem?” ME Quarterly

Once thought concentrated in Africa, FGM has now been discovered to be common wherever Islam is found. 

There are indications that FGM might be a phenomenon of epidemic proportions in the Arab Middle East. Hosken, for instance, notes that traditionally all women in the Persian Gulf region were mutilated. Arab governments refuse to address the problem. -- "Is Female Genital Mutilation an Islamic Problem?" ME Quarterly

Remember that this has gone on for 1400 years; and was imposed on a population that had been formerly Christian or pagan.

FGM is practiced on large scale in Islamic Indonesia; and is increasing.

...far from scaling down, the problem of FGM in Indonesia has escalated sharply. The mass ceremonies in Bandung have grown bigger and more popular every year. -- Guardian

The horrified British author of that Guardian article is still deluded that Islam does not support FGM, when in fact it is now settled that FGM is a core Islamic practice. Islamic women have been brainwashed to support their own abuse.

Abu Sahlieh further cited Muhammad as saying, "Circumcision is a sunna (tradition) for the men and makruma (honorable deed) for the women."  -- “Is Female Genital Mutilation an Islamic Problem?” ME Quarterly

What other tyranny does this? Not even the Nazis mutilated their own women!

Unlike the 20th-century totalitarians whose killing fury consumed themselves, reducing their longevity, Islam paces itself. In the end, though slower, Islam has killed and tortured far more than any other creed, religious or secular. Unlike secular tyranny, Islam, by virtue of its polygamy and sexual predations, reproduces itself and  increases. 

Other tyrannies are furious infections, which burn hot, but are soon overcome. Islam is a slow terminal cancer, which metastasizes, and takes over. It never retreats. Its methods are more insidious, often imperceptible at first, driven by demographics. Like cancer, excision may be the only cure.

So whenever you read about this or that Israeli outrage -- and there may be truth to the complaint -- place the news in context. Look whom the Israelis are fighting against. Islam is like nothing else in history.

Mike Konrad is the pen name of an American who is not Jewish, Latin, or Arab. He runs a website, http://latinarabia.com, where he discusses the subculture of Arabs in Latin America. He wishes his Spanish were better.

For the rest, see:
 http://americanthinker.com/2014/05/the_greatest_murder_machine_in_history.html
 

Muhammad and the Anti-Christ Religion of Islam

Varied Authors. Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th Ed. “Muhammad and the Religion of Islam.” Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

Given the forum’s interest in orbital learning, divine providence (Reformation theology, WCF, 5)…inquiries into Islam proceed.

When catechetized, e.g. the Westminster Confession of Faith, learning is a corollary concern in life; it’s natural.

Outline

The Foundations of Islam

1. Muhammed: the Prophet and his message

A. Life and works
B. Character and achievements
C. The legacy of Muhammed

2. Sources of Islamic doctrinal and social views

3. Islamic scripture: the Qur’an

A. Form
B. Doctrines of the Qur’an
C. Origins and compilation of the Qur’an
D. Interpretations
E. Translations

4. Hadith, traditions of the prophets

A. Nature and origins
B. Historical development
C. The science of Hadith
D. The compilations
E. Sectarian variations
F. Significance of Hadith

5. Fundamental practices and institutions of Islam

A. The five pillars
B. Sacred places and days

Islamic Thought

1. Origins, nature and significance of Islamic theology

A. Early developments
B. The Hellenistic legacy

2. Theology and sectarianism

A. The Khawarij
B. The Mu`tazilah
C. The Sunnah
D. The Shi`ah
E. Other groups

3. Islamic mysticism

A. History
B. Sufi literature
C. Sufi thought and literature
D. Theosophical literature
E. Sufi orders
F. Significance

4. Islamic philosophy

A. The Eastern philosophers
B. The Western philosophers

5. The new wisdom: synthesis of philosophy and mysticism

A. Philosophy, traditionalism, and the new wisdom
B. Primary teachers of the new wisdom
C. Impact of modernism

The Culture of Islam

1. Islamic law, Shari`ah

A. Nature and significance of Islamic law
B. Historical development of Shari`ah law
C. The substance of traditional Shar`ah law
D. Law in contemporary Islam

2. Social and ethical principles

A. Family life
B. The state
C. Education
D. Cultural diversity

3. Religion and the arts

A. The visual arts
B. Music
C. Literature
D. Architecture

4. Islamic myth and legend

A. Sources and variations
B. Types of myth and legend
C. Illustrations of myth and legend
D. Significance and modern interpretations

The Foundations of Islam

Muhammed: the Prophet and his message. Islam was created by a false prophet with religio-Imperialist and socio-economic ambitions. His name is Muhammed, born in Mecca, c. AD 570, and died c. AD 632. The religion is entitled “Islam” which means surrender to Allah (Arabic for “God”) as revealed in the fevered revelations of this displaced chap and caravan-raider-gone-big. Those revelations had an oral tradition and were written down in the Qur’an (=Koran).

Muhammed’s deal was his vision that he, by Allah’s will, was the final prophet. While he noted Adam, Noah, Jesus and others as prophets, he was the “last prophet” whose prophecies “abrogated” those of the earlier prophets. This Anti-Christ nonsense would soon be backed up by the sword, astute commercial treaties, taxation policies, and numerous military victories. His victories were judgments on its victims.

He was handed around, as a lad, in varied tribal families. About 610, he got his big vision of a majestic being with a vocal call, “You are the messenger of God.” It sounds like something out of Benny Hinn or a TBN-prophet. The varied revelations were sometimes accompanied by noises (e.g. a bell) or simple internal ideas. They were viewed as the “Word of Allah” to which "all must submit." He gathered some sympathizers around him, but his ideas accosted nomadic and Arabian polytheism.

He ran into opposition at Mecca. He had begun preaching publicly with implied critiques of rich merchants, a message that was not entirely popular with the mercantilists. “There is no god but Allah” coupled with his economic complaints. By 616, some Meccan forces united to oppose Muhammad; he and followers headed off to Medina. By 627, a Constitution is developed in Medina acknowledging Muhammed as the source for adjudication of any disputes. For 5 years, he gathers others.

He engages in numerous “benevolent” (tongue-in-cheek) razzias (=”raids”) on varied caravans. He personally led 3 “raids” in 623. Big point here: he becomes what he’s criticized, a materialistic gamer with a self-created religion. These razzias expand to Syria and Yemen. By 624, he puts out orders to accost caravans to and from Yemen. Varied Jewish groups oppose him and his policies begin to shift; finally, there is a break with the Jews. In 624, he conducts a successful raid on a Syrian caravan which he views as a “vindication” of his prophetic sovereignty. More raids and battles. Two are notable, the Victory of Badr, Syria, 624 and the Battle of Uhud.

A crafty and able chap, he made life simple. Submit to Islam and we can have a socio-economic pact: no raids. It was a Mafia-protection racket provided you submit. Given humanity’s depravity, the thinking goes: “What’s a minor theological accommodation, a little Allah, for the sake of peace and commercial progress?” There were clear economic and material advantages.

His closing years were accompanied by more alliances. He became “militarily the strongest man in Arabia.” By 630, he had a very successful raid in Syria along with further arrangements. His attitude to Christians began to change as well including Copts in Egypt and Ethiopia. His power had united Arabia and, shortly after his death in 632, his fanatics were poised to conquer Syria and Iraq.

Muhammad was reviled by medieval European scholars. He undoubtedly approved of assassination plots. He indubitably conquered with the sword. He indubitably ran a Mafia-protection racket. He indubitably united “religion and state” backed by the sword and bribery.

20 years after his death, his federation extended to Libya and Persia. The Byzantine Empire and Persian Empire felt his sting: “Islam is the basis of Arab unity.” Jihad was the war cry, meaning “Holy War” and “Holy Surrender.” This would also extend to Spain and into India.

Christians and Jews were the “people of the book.” As such, they were “taxed.” All others: “convert or die.” Not quite the religion of peace as is often put forward.

As Confessing Christian Churchmen, this Anti-Christian religion needs further exposition.

Anglican Bishops Against Free Speech

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16621

 

Anglican Bishops Against Free Speech
By David Mills
FIRST THINGS http://www.firstthings.com/
September 19, 2012

Four Anglican bishops serving in northeastern Africa and Cyprus have written the United Nations asking that "an international declaration be negotiated that outlaws the intentional and deliberate insulting or defamation of persons (such as prophets), symbols, texts and constructs of belief deemed holy by people of faith." They make this proposal in response to the recent movie on Muhammad and "similar offensive incidents [which] have occurred in some European countries" and "evoked massive and violent responses worldwide."

It is a bad idea, a very bad idea, on many levels. For one thing, such a law would violate the Western ideal of free speech we should not give up. For another, it would quickly be used to suppress not only "deliberate insulting or defamation" but reasonable criticism and disagreement. One man's well-and kindly-argued belief that another man is in error can be to that other man insult and defamation, especially if he has no natural appreciation for the free exchange of ideas.

What if, for example, someone pursuing higher critical studies of the Koran decides that much of it is made up, the way for two centuries now many people have argued that much of the gospel story is made up? What about the basic Christian proclamation of the uniqueness of Christ as the Savior of the world, which, however nuanced and with however great an understanding of the value of other religions (as described in Nostra Aetate, for example), still declares that other religions are deeply mistaken?

Would not those ideas be taken by the followers of the religions criticized as insult and defamation? And why should only the beliefs of the religious be protected? Shouldn't the "constructs of belief" of secular people be equally protected? If they believe that, say, the practice of homosexuality is a human good, shouldn't they be protected from the insult and defamation of those who insist it isn't?

Restrictions on free speech only expand. Nearly everyone, understandably, wants his ideas protected and freed from public evaluation. A proposal that begins with the hope that people will stop insulting Mohammad will grow to include limits on all sorts of ideas the proposers never intended. Except, of course, in the West, limits on attacks on Christianity. We will not see the solicitude extending to Islam and even to secular commitments extended, or extended very often or very far, to Christianity.

It is significant that the bishops, one of whom is a former colleague of mine, write solely about incidents of Muslims reacting violently to ideas or works they don't like. We don't see Christians, or Jews, or Buddhists, or Sikhs, or anyone else responding to ideas by rioting, much less by rioting against and killing people who don't have anything to do with the ideas they dislike. There's a reason many people are making jokes like "Remember the time we stormed the British embassy when The Life of Brian came out, and pulled down their flag and beat up all those guys working there? That'll teach them not to insult our faith. It was gre . . . oh wait, we didn't do that." It is a bad thing when violence and the constant threat of violence lead people to concede unilaterally an important part of their culture and law to placate those who do not think like that. That tells the world, and the violent themselves, nothing good.

*****

Bishops, Religious Freedom, and Islamist Terror

Mark Tooleywww.theird.org
September 21, 2012

Sadly, four Anglican bishops in the Middle East have joined to endorse international blasphemy laws.

"In view of the current inflamed situation in several countries in response to the production of a film in the USA which evidently intends to offend our Muslim brothers and sisters by insulting the Prophet Mohammed, and in view of the fact that in recent years similar offensive incidents have occurred in some European countries which evoked massive and violent responses worldwide, we hereby suggest that an international declaration be negotiated that outlaws the intentional and deliberate insulting or defamation of persons (such as prophets), symbols, texts and constructs of belief deemed holy by people of faith," they wrote the United Nations general secretary.

The four bishops serve in or are responsible for churches in Egypt, Cyprus and the Gulf, North Africa, and the Horn of Africa.

The bishops' letter, as noted by "Anglican Ink," somewhat echoes the 2011 United Nations' resolution urging nations to "combat" negative speech and attitude about religious groups. It dropped a specific reference to "defamation" long pushed by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) of 56 majority Muslim countries. Like the UN Declaration of Human Rights, the resolution affirms freedom of expression. But clearly its emphasis is on squelching criticism.

Likewise the Anglican bishops insisted their proposed declaration would not contradict freedom of expression. But their suggestion is to "outlaw" defamation of religion, which certainly does assail free speech. They understandably want to preempt violence, but by restraining "malicious opinions." The bishops concluded that "as people living here in the Middle East, we see that the way ahead for peaceful coexistence and religious harmony is through mutual respect and love."

Who can fault these poor bishops, responsible for tiny, besieged flocks, saying what they must for continued survival? Unlike the U.S. Embassy in Cairo trying to appease the mob, Christian communities in the Middle East have no earthly power to defend them. Amid ongoing Christian exodus from the region, they are trying to preserve what remains. God bless them. But Christians elsewhere, with other people of conscience, must defend truly free expression, even when Islamist killers threaten. Otherwise, today's free societies may slide into what these bishops must now routinely experience.

Christians in sub-Saharan Africa, who unlike declining Mideast churches are surging in numbers, are typically more robust in defending religious freedom. Nigeria's Catholic bishops recently denounced the Islamist terror group Boko Haram and demanded their national government act aggressively to defend vulnerable Christians in the country's mostly Islamic north.

"The patience of Christians, especially in the north, has been tried and tested for too long now through the unprovoked and senseless killing of Christians by the dreaded Islamic sect," the bishops announced. "We ask that the reckless attacks on them and other innocent Nigerians be brought to a halt through the proper use of intelligence and expertise available of government and security agencies both within and beyond Nigeria."

Nigeria's Catholic bishops cited their national Constitution's protection of religious freedom. But they regretted that "some Nigerians misunderstand their right to religion as right to persecute other Nigerians of different religious persuasion. The right to propagate one's religion must not be exercised in ways that violate the right of people of other religions. We deplore the use and abuse of religion to trample on the rights of others."

Not shy, the bishops denounced their violent enemies as blasphemous and fraudulent. "We wish to note that those who claim that they love God while hating their fellow human beings, even to the extent of killing them, are liars," the bishops declared. "God has not given anyone the right to kill in his name. Neither has he authorized anyone to violate the dignity of other human beings."

One bishop preached to his fellow Nigerian prelates: "We must speak out loud and clear against some states in the northern part of our country, where the fundamental human rights of Christians to freedom of religion and worship are abbreviated, where Christians are not permitted to proclaim their faith publicly; where they are not allowed to acquire lands for the building of Churches, schools and hospitals."

Despite supposed national legal protections, Muslim law often prevails in Nigeria's northern provinces. Nigeria's Catholic bishops, similar to its Anglican and most other Protestant leaders, do not trumpet limits on freedom of speech to "protect" religion but instead are demanding full religious liberty for all persons.

No doubt many American church leaders could profit from their courageous and morally consistent example.


The following article appeared on the American Spectator website and was reposted with permission

(Jihad Watch): Children Killed in Kenya Church Attack

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201293083628417301.html Children killed in Kenya church attack

At least two children killed and two others wounded in Nairobi after suspected grenade attack on church.  30 Sep 2012 15:06

Attack comes days after Kenyan troops launched an offensive on the southern Somali port of Kismayo [Reuters]

At least two children have been killed and two others wounded when a hand grenade was allegedly thrown into a church in the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, police officials say. Moses Nyakwama, the city's police chief, confirmed the injuries in the attack on Sunday. He said that police suspected the cause of the explosion was a grenade. Charles Owino, a deputy police spokesman, said that the attack at St Polycarp's church occurred on Juja Road, in the eastern part of the city. The grenade exploded, spraying the children with shrapnel. Blood-stained children's jackets and shoes lay scattered on the floor, surrounded by remnants of metal walls that were broken and twisted by the force of the explosion. "The children who attend this service are aged between six and 10... we usually divide them according to their ages," said Livingstone Muiruri. "They had just started the morning session when the explosion occurred." "We were in the main church so we all ran there to assist the kids," he said. Janet Wanja was just entering the church when the blast shook the building. "I heard a loud explosion and then heard kids screaming," she said. "I am traumatised by what I saw, kids with injuries and blood all over. "Why are they attacking the church?" Al-Shabab suspected "We suspect this blast might have been carried out by sympathisers of al-Shabab," said Owino. "These are the kicks of a dying horse since, of late, Kenyan police have arrested several suspects in connection with grenades." Police were also investigating the possibility that the blast was a result of a bomb that had been placed in the building earlier, Wilfred Mbithi, another senior police official, told AFP. Following the attack, dozens of angry young men targeted people of Somali appearance and their homes in the area. Police units were deployed to keep the angry mob from causing damage. The attack on the church came days after Kenyan troops launched an offensive on the southern Somali port of Kismayo, the last stronghold of the al-Shabaab, forcing the fighters to flee. Masked assailants launched simultaneous gun and grenade raids on two churches in the northern town of Garissa in July, killing at least 17 people. Kenya has suffered a series of grenade attacks since it sent troops across the border last October in pursuit of al-Shabab fighters who it blamed for kidnapping its security personnel and Western tourists.

(BBC) Jihad Watch: 1400 Dead at Hands of Nigerian Islamo-Facists

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19691781

Nigeria church bombed in Bauchi, Boko Haram flashpoint

Continue reading the main story

Nigeria under attack

• Fuel on Jos fire
• Boko Haram's shadowy leader
• 'My city of fear'
• Who are Boko Haram?

A suicide bomber has attacked a church in northern Nigeria , killing at least two people and injuring 48, according to the Red Cross.

Witnesses at the scene in the city of Bauchi said they heard a blast near St John's Church, possibly in a car park.

Bauchi has often been targeted by the Islamist Boko Haram group, which wants to impose Sharia law across Nigeria.

Sunday attacks on churches took place regularly earlier this year but had eased in recent months.

Attacks in central and northern Nigeria blamed on Boko Haram have killed some 1,400 people since 2010.

On 16 September, Nigerian security forces said they killed Boko Haram's spokesman Abu Qaqa in a gun battle in the northern state of Kano.

However, the group has not confirmed his death.

Meanwhile, the military in Yobe state imposed a 24-hour curfew on two cities as soldiers went door-to-door, searching for Boko Haram members.

"Residents of the two cities are to remain indoors until further notice to enable security personnel to fish out Boko Haram terrorists," a military spokesman told the AFP news agency.

Jihad Watch: Islamo-Facists Murdering Christians in Nigeria

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16552

Posted by David Virtue on 2012/9/22 17:40:00 (221 reads)
 

US CANA Bishop Reports Suffering and Killing of Christians in Nigeria

McLean, VA (September 21, 2012) - The Rt. Rev. Julian M. Dobbs, Anglican Bishop in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America has recently returned from a visit to Nigeria where he reports on the suffering of Christians as a result of the attacks orchestrated by Islamist group Boko Haram.

In a recent report, Bishop Dobbs talks of congregations in Bauchi being completely wiped out and described the situation as "butchery on a daily basis."

His video report can be viewed at this link https://vimeo.com/49781288

Bishop Dobbs spent time in the north of Nigeria where Christian homes and businesses have been destroyed, churches burnt and Christians killed. He met with survivors of these attacks and many of their church leaders. The Church of Nigeria [Anglican Communion] is the largest Anglican province in the world with over 20 million Anglicans.

Dobbs reports that 25 churches in the Anglican Diocese of Jalingo have been destroyed, a recent bomb was detonated in the cathedral, and members of the diocese cannot find employment because they have Christian names.

"In Maiduguri, 100 bombs have exploded, fathers have been killed by their own children if they do not agree with their religious views, and schools have been blown up."

The Bishop of Maiduguri reported, "We will keep the faith...If we perish, we perish."

To schedule an interview with Bishop Dobbs please contact Mrs. Annie Rothgeb at (703) 678-7371 or email: Annie.Rothgeb@CanaConovcation.org

The Convocation of Anglicans in North America http://www.canaconvocation.org/ currently consists of more than 90 congregations, 200 clergy and additionally 150 military and civilians Chaplains. CANA was established in 2005 to provide a means by which Anglicans living in the USA who were alienated by the actions and decisions of The Episcopal Church could continue to live out their faith without compromising their core convictions. Created as a missionary initiative of the Church of Nigeria, about a dozen of the congregations are primarily expatriate Nigerians. CANA is a founding member of the Anglican Church in North America, an emerging Anglican province that includes about 700 congregations.

Expert laments ‘toxic attitude’ that ‘anyone offending Islam must be punished’

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=15571

Expert laments ‘toxic attitude’ that ‘anyone offending Islam must be punished’

CWN - September 13, 2012

Addressing a symposium on international religious freedom, a Georgetown University scholar and former US diplomat decried the “toxic attitude that anyone offending Islam must be punished.”    “Violent actions against blasphemy in the Muslim world are symptoms of a dangerous pathology with strategic implications,” said Thomas Farr, director of the Religious Freedom Project and the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs at Georgetown University. “At its root is the view, widely accepted among Muslims abroad, that anyone who offends Islam must be punished, either by the state or private actors.”    Farr, who addressed the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ June meeting, continued:

Across the world we are seeing increasing levels of violence against anyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, accused of blasphemy, defamation of Islam, or apostasy … Yesterday US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stephens and three other Americans were murdered by people offended by a film insulting the Prophet Mohammed. The walls of the US Embassy in Cairo were stormed by mobs because of that film.

Let me be clear. No one should insult the sacred beliefs of another. It is an assault on human dignity and respect for others. But the malevolent idea that the proper response to defamation of religion is criminal prosecution, let alone violence or murder, is a dangerous problem in the Muslim-majority world. My religion is insulted regularly by the New York Times and the Washington Post. I frequently am outraged. But I try to respond with my voice or my pen. That is the only way people with deep differences can live together in a civilized society.

It is frankly a source of great concern to me that the US Embassy in Cairo issued a press release yesterday, on the anniversary of 9/11, that did not condemn this violence against innocent people, but condemned those who “hurt the religious feelings of Muslims” and other religious believers. The issue here is not hurt feelings. It is violent religious extremism that is destroying lives and endangering American security`. I would have thought that American diplomats learned decades ago that appeasement of tyrants does not work. It simply makes things worse.

This toxic attitude — that anyone offending Islam must be punished — is responsible for many of the growing numbers of attacks on religious minorities worldwide, attacks that are causing an estimated 150,000 Christian deaths per year. This tragedy, I would submit, warrants far more attention that it has received from Western policy makers and the media.

“It is in the vital interests of the United States that nations like Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Egypt overcome violent religious extremism and achieve stable democracies and economic development,” Farr continued. “This will not happen so long as Muslims believe that those who offend Islam must be met with violence, either through criminal prosecution, mob action, or murder. In short, the United States must become more effective at supporting in these countries those Muslims who know that Islam can be defended without violence, and that embracing religious freedom is in their vital interests.”

Islamo-fascist Watch: Islam's Black Flag Flies over Egypt

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/12268/islam-black-flag-flies-over-egypt

The United States embassy of Egypt is under siege. According to Fox News, "Mainly ultraconservative Islamist protesters climbed the walls of the U.S. Embassy in Egypt's capital Tuesday and brought down the flag, replacing it with a black flag with an Islamic inscription to protest a video attacking Islam's prophet, Muhammad. Hundreds of protesters marched to the embassy in downtown Cairo …. Dozens of protesters then scaled the embassy walls, went into the courtyard and took down the flag from a pole. They brought it back to the crowd outside, which tried to burn it, but failing that, tore it apart. The protesters on the wall then raised on the flagpole a black flag with the Muslim declaration of faith on it, 'There is no god but God and Muhammad is his prophet.' The flag, similar to the banner used by al-Qaida, is commonly used by ultraconservatives around the region…. By evening, the protest grew with thousands standing outside the embassy, chanting 'Islamic, Islamic. The right of our prophet will not die.' A group of women in black veils and robes that left only their eyes exposed chanted, 'Worshippers of the Cross, leave the Prophet Muhammad alone.'"

Some clarifications for context: Islam's black flag with the shehada and sword inscription is not an al-Qaeda banner but rather Islam's most ancient banner, popularized by the Abbasid caliphs in the 800s. In other words, these protesters were not imitating al-Qaeda; rather they—and al-Qaeda—are imitating Islam's heritage, replete with jihad against the infidel. Same with the phrase "worshippers of the cross"—Islam's ancient appellation for the hated Christians.

The reason behind this latest rampage is Muslim outrage over the appearance of a film deemed offensive about the Islamic prophet Muhammad. Apparently it depicts him inciting jihads, deceiving people, and exercising his libido—not unlike what is recorded in Islam's own authoritative biographies and hadiths of the prophet. It is not exactly clear who made the video, though Egyptian expatriates and Copts are being accused, possibly in conjunction with Pastor Terry Jones. In other words, the reason for this latest bit of Muslim outrage is once again the issue of free speech—in the same camp of Danish Muhammad cartoons, burned Korans, and any number of other freedoms of expression exercised by non-Muslims, and even Muslims.

The U.S.'s formal response to this terror campaign against its embassy and the desecration of the American flag has, once again, been to lay the blame on free speech. In a statement, the U.S. said, "The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals [film makers] to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims—as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

Interestingly, while very concerned about the "religious feelings of Muslims," the U.S. embassy in Egypt had nothing to say about the fact that, right before it was attacked, a Christian man in Egypt stood on trial for "insulting" Islam—even as a throng of Muslims besieged the court-house, interrupting the hearing and calling for the man's death. Apparently appeasing thin skins is more important than speaking up for those whose lives are at stake—not just Christian Egyptians, but now U.S. employees—over issues of freedom.

Left unsaid and unknown in any Western media is the fact that the U.S. embassy has long been under threat, but for different reasons. Earlier, the Egyptian paper El Fagr reported that Jihadi groups in Egypt, including Islamic Jihad, the Sunni Group, and Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya had issued a statement threatening to burn the U.S. embassy in Cairo to the ground unless all the Islamic jihadis currently imprisonment and in detention centers in the U.S. including Guantanamo Bay were released: "The group, which consists of many members from al-Qaeda, called [especially] for the quick release of the jihadi [mujahid] sheikh, Omar Abdul Rahman [the "Blind Sheikh"], whom they described as a scholar and jihadi who sacrificed his life for the Egyptian Umma, who was ignored by the Mubarak regime, and [President] Morsi is refusing to intervene on his behalf and release him, despite promising that he would. The Islamic Group has threatened to burn the U.S. Embassy in Cairo with those in it, and taking hostage those who remain [alive], unless the Blind Sheikh is immediately released."

Despite all this—despite longstanding threats to the U.S. embassy, followed by a real attack, culminating with the destruction of the American flag—Victoria Nuland, the U.S. State Department's Spokesperson, speaking in response to this latest attack, said that "none of this suggests that there are hostile feelings for the U.S. in Egypt."

In fact, none of this is surprising—neither the attack on the U.S. embassy, nor the U.S. government's head-in-the-sand response, with strong words reserved only for those non-Muslims exercising their free speech rights. This event also explains the situation in a way that even a child can understand: the more you appease—as the Obama administration has been doing with the Islamic world in ways unprecedented—the more contempt you earn from those you appease, and the more demands will be made of you. Thus, today, far from being respected as a super-power, the U.S. is increasingly seen as a subdued, contemptuous dhimmi—who must say "how high?" whenever Muslims command "jump!"

Screening of controversial Channel 4 documentary on history of Islam cancelled after presenter is threatened

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16509

Screening of controversial Channel 4 documentary on history of Islam cancelled after presenter is threatened
Historian Tom Holland received online abuse after programme prompted more than 1,200 complaints

By LIZ THOMAShttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Sept. 11, 2012

Islam: The Untold Story, a documentary by historian Tom Holland, pictured, sparked a backlash by viewers and has now been cancelled Channel 4 has been forced to cancel a screening of the controversial documentary Islam: The Untold Story, after the presenter was threatened with physical violence.

Historian Tom Holland received abusive messages on Twitter and warnings he would come to harm because of the film, in which he suggests that Islam is a 'made-up' religion. The programme has already been aired on Channel 4, sparking more than 1,200 complaints, but the broadcaster was planning a screening for 'opinion formers' at its London headquarters later this month. It had hoped to organise a debate around the screening but the whole event has had to be axed because of fears it would be targeted.

Critics have accused Holland of distorting the history of the religion in Islam: The Untold Story.

His investigation into its origins claimed that there is little written contemporary evidence about the prophet Mohammed. He also suggests the Koran makes little or no reference to Islam's holy city of Mecca, and argues there is no evidence for the general assertion that Islam began 'fully formed' in the 7th century. The Islamic Education and Research Academy accused him of making 'baseless assumptions' and engaging in 'selective scholarship'. Holland received abusive tweets questioning his views on the religion.

Some posted physical threats to the Cambridge-educated historian via Twitter, while one called him a 'fool' for suggesting Islam is a 'made-up religion'. Ofcom - which received 150 of the complaints regarding the programme's inaccuracy, alleged bias and offence to Muslims - said it was considering launching an investigation. A Channel 4 spokeswoman said: 'Having taken security advice, we have reluctantly cancelled a planned screening of the programme Islam: The Untold Story. We remain extremely proud of the film which is still available to view on 4oD.'

Holland's investigation into Islam's origins claimed that there is little written contemporary evidence about the prophet Mohammed Holland, the author of best-sellers Rubicon and Persian Fire, said that Islam is 'a legitimate subject of historical inquiry'. Writing on the Channel 4 website after complaints to both the channel and watchdog Ofcom, he said: 'We were of course aware when making the programme that we were touching deeply held sensitivities and went to every effort to ensure that the moral and civilizational power of Islam was acknowledged in our film, and the perspective of Muslim faith represented, both in the persons of ordinary Bedouin in the desert, and one of the greatest modern scholars of Islam, Seyyed Hossein Nasr.'

Holland was defended by Dr Jenny Taylor who runs the charity Lapido Media, which encourages better understanding and reporting of religion in the media. 'He's shown all of us that Islam is interesting enough to be taken seriously. He's refused to stick his head in the sand and play blind about the problems or internal tensions that all thinking Muslims know are there,' she said. 'He's not trammelled the sacred heart of an ancient mystery but found hints of an even greater and more awesome reality that is tantalisingly beyond our grasp at the moment, but could just be the key to a shared past and shared future.' Last month BBC comedy series Citizen Khan, about a Muslim community leader, received 200 complaints following its first episode.

Citizen Khan, about a Muslim community leader, sparked hundreds of complaints from viewers who said it took the 'mickey out of Islam' It was claimed that the programme 'takes the mickey out of Islam', was guilty of 'stereotypes about Asians' and was 'disrespectful to the Koran'. One scene that particularly provoked anger was where a heavily-made up girl, Mr Khan's daughter, rushed to put on a hijab and pretended to be reading the Koran when her father entered. The six-part series, which aired for the first time on BBC1 in August, was created by British Muslim Adil Ray, who also plays the lead role.

END

Iran's Jihadist-Religio-Legal System? Nadarkhani Released

http://www.anglicanink.com/article/iran-frees-pastor-yousef-nadarkhani

Iran frees Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani

Court acquits Nadarkhani of apostasy charge

Article | September 8, 2012 - 7:53am | By George Conger

 

CSW

 

The Iranian Christian pastor awaiting execution has been acquitted of the charge of apostasy and released from imprisonment.

Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) reports that at an 8 September 2012 hearing, the court overturned Yousef Nadarkhani’s 2010 conviction for apostasy, finding him guilty instead of proselytizing Muslims. He was sentenced to three years imprisonment, but released for time served.

In 2009, Mr. Nadarkhani was arrested and charged with apostasy after he complained that new government regulations requiring that his two sons, Daniel (10) and Yoel (8) be instructed in Islam in school violated the Iranian constitution’s guarantee of the free practice of religion.

Born in a non-practicing Muslim family, Mr. Nadarkhani (35) converted to Christianity as a young man and for the past ten years has been the pastor of a network of house churches in the town of Rasht in Iran’s Gilan province on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea.

In 2006, he was jailed on charges of apostasy but released from prison after two weeks. Following his complaint about his sons’ indoctrination, Mr. Nadarkhani was arrested and brought before a political tribunal on 12 October 2009, charged with apostasy and proselytizing Muslims.

Initially held in solitary confinement in Lakan prison in Rasht, Mr. Nadarkhani was permitted access to an attorney and his family was allowed to visit – however, he was also pressed to recant his Christian faith, and at one point was taken to a mental hospital after it was suggested his refusal to return to Islam was a sign of insanity.

On 18 June 2010, his wife Fatemah (Tina) Pasindedih was arrested, charged with apostasy and after trial was given a life term of imprisonment. However, her sentence was overturn on appeal and she was released from prison.

Mr. Nadarkhani was brought to trial on 21-22 September 2010 before the 1st Court of the Revolutionary Tribunal. On 13 November 2010 the court handed down a guilty verdict and ordered he be hanged for the crime of apostasy. The third chamber of the Iranian Supreme Court in Qom on 28 June 2011 upheld the conviction for apostasy and the death sentence, but stayed execution pending an investigation by the local court to determine when Mr. Nadarkhani had left Islam.

In October 2011 the trial court wrote to the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khameini, requesting his opinion as to how to proceed. It was subsequently announced that the local court would review the proceedings in light of further investigations and of Sharia law precedents.

Each of Islam’s five major schools of jurisprudence call for the death penalty for those who leave Islam for another faith. However Islamic law distinguishes between apostasy of an adult and a child. The ‘Umdat as-Salik wa ‘Uddat an-Nasik (Reliance of the Traveler and Tools of the Worshipper), of the Shafi’i school of Islamic jurisprudence as practiced by the Al-Azhar in Cairo rejects the death penalty for child apostates, as does the Hidayah, the Hanafi code that guides Muslim jurisprudence in India and Pakistan.

Iran’s proposed Islamic Penal Law also divides apostates into two categories: parental and innate. Innate apostates were those whose parents were Muslim, made a profession of Islam—the Shahada-as an adult and then left the faith, while parental apostates were those born in non-Muslim families and converted to Islam as an adult, and then left the faith.

Article 225-7 states the “Punishment for an innate apostate is death,” while Article 225-8 allows a parental apostate three days to recant their apostasy. If they continued in their unbelief, “the death penalty would be carried out.” Women apostates were spared the death penalty, but would have been jailed until they recanted. Discretion in applying the sentence of death, however, is given to the court.


The push to impose penal sanctions on apostates from Islam comes amidst a rise in conversions to Christianity in Iran. Approximately 200,000 or one percent of Iran’s population, belong to officially sanctioned groups that have historic ties to the region such as the Armenian, Assyrian and Catholic Churches.
 
However, the number of Protestant Christians is unclear. In 1979, there were less than 500 known Christians from a Muslim background in Iran. “Today the most conservative estimate is that there are at least 100,000 believers in the nation,” reports Elam Ministry—a British based Christian ministry to Persians.

News of the release of Mr. Nadarkhani was greeted with joy by Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW). The organization’s chief executive, Mervyn Thomas said, "CSW is delighted to learn of Pastor Nadarkhani’s release after a long incarceration. We commend the Iranian judiciary for this step, which is a triumph for justice and the rule of law.”

“While we rejoice at this wonderful news, we do not forget hundreds of others who are harassed or unjustly detained on account of their faith, and CSW is committed to continue campaigning until all of Iran’s religious minorities are able to enjoy religious freedom as guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Iran is party.”

Jihad Watch: Advisor to Egyptian President: "Uncircumcized Girls `Lack Faith'"



Egyptian President: Mohammed Morsi

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/2012/09/female-advisor-to-egyptian-president-girls-not

Female Advisor to Egyptian President: Girls Not Circumcised "Lacking in Faith"

 

by Raymond Ibrahim • Sep 8, 2012 at 3:47 pm
Cross-posted from Jihad Watch

 

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/2012/09/female-advisor-to-egyptian-president-girls-not

 

Print

Send

RSS

Share

Earlier this week, Egypt's Tahrir News conducted an interview with Dr. Amima Kamal, advisor to President Morsi on Women's Affairs, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice party, and a member of the Constituent Assembly.

Women's Affairs Advisor to President Morsi: Uncircumcised woman "lacking in faith."

The discussion about female circumcision, or female genital mutilation, is causing some controversy. When asked what advice she would give to President Morsi concerning this practice, she said she would tell him that it should only be performed when the girl reaches puberty, and that it is wrong to perform it, as sometimes happens, when the girl is only seven or eight years old.

Despite coming off somewhat neutral at times, saying for instance that the practice is not strictly Islamic, although it is permissible, at one point she asserted that those girls who do not have the operation performed are "lacking in faith [iman]."
Criticism naturally followed—including from Egypt's National Council for Women, which condemned Kamal's remarks as "against the dignity of Egyptian women"—and Kamal now denies making the comment.

In fact, Egyptian female politicians talking about how women are "lacking" is becoming commonplace. Earlier, for example, another female political candidate associated with the Salafi party said that women are lacking in "intelligence."