WHAT IS ISLAM
AN ETHICAL BASIS FOR WAR
by Bill Warner (Jan 2007)
KNOW THE ENEMY
This work is based upon Sun Tsu’s The
Art of War a 2,500 year old Chinese book of strategy.
The word islam means submission. “Submission” is a political thought.
Islam claims that all who do not submit are unbelievers (kafirs). It is time to reject being named by Islam. We are not “unbelievers.”
Muslims are the slaves of Allah. We are not the slaves of Allah. We do not submit. We are the Free. Instead of Muslims and nonbelievers, it is Muslims and the Free. Muslims, therefore, are the un-Free.
[If you don’t know a word, look it up on the last page.]
The story of Islam starts with the Jews since Islam is a Jewish heresy. The Koran endlessly adapts Jewish stories such as those of Moses and Noah to show that Mohammed is the prophet of Allah. The Ten Commandments is a good place to start looking at Islam. They fall into two categories—religious and ethical.
1. Do not have any other gods before Me.
2. Do not make an image or any likeness of Me.
3. Do not swear falsely by the name of the Lord.
4. Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. Do not murder.
7. Do not commit adultery.
8. Do not steal.
9. Do not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. Do not covet your neighbor’s property.
The only religion that follows all the religious commandments is that of the Jews. Christians do not follow the Sabbath commandment and some would argue that the Catholics and Orthodox sects use images that violate the image commandment. Hindus, Buddhists and atheists don’t follow any of the religious commandments. There are no two religions that agree on the Ten Commandments.
Humanity can not agree on religion.
But let’s look at the ethical commandments. Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and most atheists agree that lying, theft, murder, destroying the sanctity of family, and lusting after other people’s property is bad behavior.
Upon reflection, all of these prohibitions prevent harm to others. We don’t harm others and we don’t want to be harmed. We all want to be treated well and this is the best way to treat others, hence the Golden Rule:
Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.
The Golden Rule is an ethic of unity. Everyone is treated the same. One ethical system for all people.
This has been said in many ways in many religions and cultures. But there is a religion and culture that does not agree with these ethics—Islam.
What are Islamic ethics and where do we find them? Everything in Islam is based upon the Koran (what Mohammed claimed that his god, Allah, said) and the words and deeds of Mohammed (called the Sunna). A Muslim repeats endlessly, “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.” The Koran repeats again and again that Mohammed is the model or pattern for the ideal Muslim. A Muslim is not someone who worships Allah. A Muslim is someone who worships Allah exactly like Mohammed worshipped Allah. So every Muslim is a Mohammedan. There are absolutely no exceptions.
And where do we find Mohammed’s words and deeds?
1. The Traditions (or Hadith) are collections of everything Mohammed did and said. The best and most honored Hadith is by Al Bukhari.
2. The Sira is the biography of Mohammed and is written by Ibn Ishaq. The Sira is to Mohammed as the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are to Jesus.
There was not enough information in the Koran to create Islam. The Sunna (Hadith and Sira) define almost all of the doctrine of Islam.
The collection of Koran, Sira, and Hadith is called the Islamic Trilogy. The Trilogy contains the complete political doctrine of Islam. Christians have two sacred texts—Old and New Testament. Muslims have three sacred texts. For 1,400 years, these three texts have only been read by Islamic religious and political leaders, but today these texts have been made easily understood (see the Book List at the end of this pamphlet).
The Trilogy overflows with ethical statements such as these from Bukhari’s Hadith.)
B9,85,83 Mohammed: “A Muslim is a brother to other Muslims. He should never oppress them nor should he facilitate their oppression.”
B8,73,70 Mohammed: “Harming a Muslim is an evil act; killing a Muslim means rejecting Allah.”
B5,59,369 Mohammed asked, “Who will kill Ka’b (a Jewish poet), the enemy of Allah and Mohammed?”
Bin Maslama rose and responded, “O Mohammed! Would it please you if I killed him?”
Mohammed answered, “Yes.”
Bin Maslama then said, “Give me permission to deceive him with lies so that my plot will succeed.”
Mohammed replied, “You may speak falsely to him.”
A Muslim should be a brother to other Muslims (not the rest of humanity). A Muslim should not kill another Muslim. A Muslim may lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam.
So for Islam the ethical statements are:
Do not kill another Muslim.
Do not steal from another Muslim.
Do not deceive another Muslim.
Islam divides the entire world into Islam and nonbelievers and has two sets of ethics, one for Islam and another for the rest. The Golden Rule has the equality of all humanity as its basis. It is not: Do unto some people, as you would have them do unto you, but do unto all people as you would have them do unto you.
Islam denies the universality of the Golden Rule because Islam starts with the division of the entire world, all humanity, into two different groups—Islamic and non-Islamic. Every aspect of Islamic ethics is based upon this separation. Having two distinct groups leads to two different ethical codes. Said another way, Islam has dualistic ethics.
Deceit, violence and force are optional actions against the unbelievers. Believers are to be treated as brothers and sisters. Islam’s ethics are based upon:
Good is whatever advances Islam.
Evil is whatever resists Islam.
The Origin of the Politics of Islam
Mohammed preached for 13 years in Mecca and only acquired about 150 followers. Following the death of his protector and uncle, the wealthy class of Mecca ran him out of town. He left with his followers and went to Medina, a town located less than a hundred miles from Mecca in what is now Saudi Arabia. There he preached for another year and obtained a hundred or so more followers.
In order to support himself and his followers, he sent men out to rob caravans from Mecca and generously distributed among them the wealth they brought back, keeping a portion for himself. Part of the wealth obtained from these raids were captives which Mohammed also distributed among his men as slaves and in some cases as wives. Slaves who agreed to convert to Islam were freed. Mohammed was never motivated by money as much as by power. He considered money a tool that could be used to fund jihad and to support his followers. These are all political actions.
Mohammed moved into a profoundly political mode. Suddenly the new Islam became popular. It was not simply a religion that would assure the poor a place of honor in a gilded paradise, but a political system that could provide them with wealth, sex and power, all to be had for the taking from the Free.
The word of Allah, as received and reported by Mohammed, is divided into two records. The Koran of Mecca was based on religious precepts. The Koran of Medina, however, became clearly political in scope and direction.
The belief that only Muslims are protected by Allah meant that non-Muslims were not afforded the usual considerations of morality, such as equality, honesty and compassion. Examples we see from Mohammed’s life show that non-Muslims can be mocked, raped, cursed, threatened, tortured, killed, robbed, or enslaved to advance the cause of Islam.
This dual system of ethics paved the way to jihad:war undertaken as an Islamic duty, [See Page 7] and are reflected in the Islamic world view:
dar al Islam, land of submission
dar al harb, land of war
In contrast, the prevailing non-Muslim world view is that all people at some fundamental level are equal, although they are not necessarily the same. Not all people are of the same ability, although all deserve to be treated fairly, compassionately and honestly. The ultimate ethical statement is: “Treat others as you wish to be treated.” In this view “others” and “self” are equal and all of humanity is to be accorded the same consideration. This is the ideal. We frequently fail to live up to the ideal, but is the ideal nevertheless.
The dual ethics of Islam are not as simple as a separate set of ethics for the non-Muslim. What makes political Islam so effective is that it has two stages of ethics for the non-Muslim. It has the ethics of the Meccan Koran (early, religious text), and the ethics of the Medinan Koran (later, political text). Islam can treat the non-Muslim well, but as an inferior (Koran of Mecca), or treat him as an enemy of Allah (Koran of Medina). Both actions are sanctioned as sacred in the Koran. Islamic apologists always refer to the Meccan ethics.
The Two Civilizations
Ethics are of primary importance. Ethics determine how you treat someone else. The ethic of unity is the basis of democracy, the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.
It was the Golden Rule that lead to the end of slavery. All civil rights were based upon the Golden Rule. Notice this is about politics, not religion. The Golden Rule goes beyond religion.
There are only two types of ethics—unity and dualistic. And so there are two civilizations—those based upon ethics of unity and those based upon dualistic ethics.
This is the crux of the matter. Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, and most atheists subscribe to the Golden Rule. A Hindu has the same ethics as a Christian. Both are workers, hold family in high regard, and don’t lie, cheat, or steal. Of course, some do, but they can be judged, shamed, and condemned on the basis of the Golden Rule ethical system.
A Muslim is not subject to the Golden Rule, and so does not feel shame at the suffering of the Free. Take slavery—Christians can be shamed over slavery. Islam has a 1,400-year history of slavery, including running the slave trade that sold the Africans to the Christians. There are no Islamic books that recall the slave trade or express any regret.
There has never been a book written wherein a Muslim recalls the historic suffering of jihad and expresses remorse or shame. Every history of jihad is glorious. Mohammed killed and enslaved the Free and established the ideal pattern for all Muslims. Mohammed never felt remorse or shame, so a Muslim feels no remorse or shame over any suffering caused by jihad.
This lack of regret or sorrow is what should be expected of a dualistic ethical civilization.
The Free cannot unite on the basis of religion, but we are already united on the basis of an ethics of unity. We just need to understand our common ethical ground. If we understand that we are all members of an ethic of unity civilization, we can also unite to defend ourselves against the attack by the dualistic ethical system of Islam.
Islam and Political Islam
Throughout the world, Islam is perceived as a religion, but it moved quickly from strictly religious teachings into one of the world’s most successful political systems. Political Islam has an unbroken 1,400-year history and continues to spread rapidly today through immigration and population growth as well as violence and terror. The most recent of these wars of conquest is that of the Islamic regime of Khartoum, which is actively engaged in a genocidal war against Sudanese Christians and Animists.
In its early years, the spread of Islam both as a religion and as a political and military force was explosive. Within ten years after Mohammed established an Islamic city-state in Medina he had absorbed the divided tribes of Arabia into one nation.
Religious vs. Political Islam
Religious Islam is focused on Five Pillars:
Repeating the creed, “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his final prophet.”
Praying five times a day facing in the direction of Mecca.
Contributing to charity to benefit other Muslims.
Fasting during the month of Ramadan.
Going on pilgrimage to Mecca.
None of the Five Pillars includes the non-Islamic world. Jihad, which is incumbent on all Muslims, is sometimes called the Sixth Pillar, but the first five pillars are religious and jihad is political.
Religious Islam strictly deals with Muslims. Political Islam is the doctrine that drives all Islamic policy about the Free.
In the Sunna—the part of the Trilogy that records Mohammed’s actions—jihad, slavery, killing, and oppression are clearly considered ethical when used to advance Islam. It is this “us” and “them” mentality that results in an ethical inequality, the duality, that is inherent in Islam. And, according to Muslims, the laws of Islam are eternal and cannot be changed, reformed or altered. It is permanent and universal. No one has the right to amend or reform it.
The Koran, the Hadith, and the Sira all emphasize that the only politics recognized by Allah are the politics of Islam. From that viewpoint, all governments must become Islamic in order to preserve peace, because Muslims can use the violence of jihad on any Free who do not submit.
Mohammed was a master of this dualistic thinking. He used the tribal jealousies and conflicts to convert, conquer, and unite on a global scale. Populations quickly recognized that they would fare better as Muslims under Islam, than as “others,” or unbelievers.
While the Free are unimpressed by Islam’s threats of Hell, they do care about how they are treated ethically and legally in this plane of existence. However, Islam declares that all non-Muslims are second-class citizens.
In the Islamic Trilogy, the Free can be treated well only if they submit to the demands of Islam. The sacred texts of Islam are adamant that the Free must submit to Islam.
Stages of Duality
Islam has two modes of Koranic behavior—the Koran of Mecca and the Koran of Medina. In Mecca, Mohammed was weak and Islam was beginning and the Koran of Mecca is religious.
Bear patiently with what the unbelievers say, and leave their company without recrimination. Leave to Me those that deny the Truth, those that enjoy the comforts of this life; bear with them yet a little while.
Koran of Mecca 73:10
Mohammed is the perfect Muslim. At first he was nice, then demanding, then violent. Demanding as in: if you don’t do what Islam dictates, first come the threats and then comes the violence.
So the “good” Muslim is a Meccan Muslim.
In Medina Mohammed transformed the religion of Islam into a political system. Killing, theft, and rape became sacralized. He became powerful and the Koranic message changed. A terrorist follows the Koran from Medina, a Medinan Muslim.
Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate.
Koran of Medina 66:9
These Koranic verses contradict each other. How do you tell which one to follow? Simple. According to the Koran, the later verse replaces the earlier verse. And wherever there is contradiction, the later Koran of Medina abrogates (annuls or cancels) the earlier Koran of Mecca. [This rule of abrogation is given in the Koran]
But knowing which verses to follow is much more complicated than that. The “nice” Koran of Mecca is still to be used if Islam is weak in political power. When Islam has the strength—force is the answer; use the Koran of Medina. All verses can be used as needed. The Koran is dualistic.
The Koran also establishes a different form of logic. Since the Koran is both true and contradictory it violates the normal rules of logic. In unitary logic if something is contradictory it is false. But the Koran is contradictory and true. This is dualistic logic. So Islam operates under a different form of reasoning than the rest of the world.
The Practice of Islamic Politics
The practical outcome of this dualistic political thinking is the following:
Force, pressure, demands, and violence are always options.
Sharia (Islamic) law must replace all other forms of law and government.
Jihad must be practiced by all Muslims.
Jihad must be everywhere, in all aspects of private and public life in the dar al harb (land of war).
The jihadists must imitate history’s model of the perfect political Muslim: Mohammed.
Islam is not just the faith of another immigrant group. No, political Islam is here to “Islamicize” us. Our culture must submit to the culture of Islam. That has been Islam’s mandate towards every other culture for 1,400 years, and here and now it’s no different. Islam is devoted to an unchanging doctrine, to follow Mohammed’s plan until all the earth is Islamic. This goal is repeated again and again in the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith.
In short, all Muslims agree with the goal; they just differ on which method of their dualistic ethics—peaceful tactics or violent ones—is the most efficient way to reach the goal of dominance.
The political nature of Islam is to control 100% of the public sphere: the news media, books, poetry, music, art, the law, constitutions, dress, food, the courts. If something is in the public domain, then Islam must control it. That means this book or anything else that stakes out the fundamental rights of the Free is forbidden by Islam.
Political Islam has another feature: it never acknowledges and never apologizes. In the last 1,400 years jihad has killed more than 270 million of the Free, yet political Islam denies having killed a single soul. Islam denies its role in slavery, even though every black slave sold to a white man was wholesaled by a Muslim. Islam has even carried on the slave trade in the 20th and 21st centuries and has never made a single acknowledgment or apology; there is no guilt. Muslims feel shame if they fail but never guilt about their successes in war and slavery. After all, their ethical doctrine supports all of their positions.
Dualism and Jihad
The dualistic ethical system of the Islamic Trilogy prepares the foundation of jihad with one set of ethics for Muslims and another set of ethics for the Free. The ethics for the Free include two ways to behave. One is to think of them as inferiors but act in a kindly way. The other is pressure, threats, and violence—jihad.
Jihad is a unique word. Its actual meaning is struggle or effort. Islam speaks of two types—the lesser jihad and the greater jihad. The greater jihad is spiritual effort or internal struggle, to stop smoking, for example, or control one’s greed. Only 3% of the Hadith refer to the greater jihad, inner struggle. The remaining 97% are about war, the lesser jihad.
The following hadith summarizes all the key elements of jihad.
B1,7,331 Mohammed: “I have been given five things which were not given to any one else before me:
1. Allah made me victorious by awe, by His frightening my enemies for a distance of one month’s journey.
2. The earth has been made for me and for my followers a place for praying and a place to perform rituals; therefore, anyone of my followers can pray wherever the time of a prayer is due.
3. The spoils of war has been made lawful for me yet it was not lawful for anyone else before me.
4. I have been given the right of intercession on the Day of Resurrection.
5. Every prophet used to be sent to his nation only but I have been sent to all mankind.”
Only the fourth item, the Day of Resurrection, is purely religious in nature. It tells us that the whole world must submit to Islam; nonbelievers are the enemy simply because they are not Muslims. To achieve this dominance, Islam may use terror and violence. It may use psychological warfare, fear, and theft. It may take the spoils of war from non-Muslims. Violence and terror are made sacred by the Koran. Peace comes only with submission to Islam.
The story of the Trilogy culminates in the dominance of political Islam through jihad. The Trilogy teaches that Islam is the perfect political system and is destined to rule the entire world. The governments and constitutions of the world must all submit to political Islam. If the political systems of the unbelievers do not submit, then force (jihad) may be used. All jihad is defensive, since refusing to submit to Islam is an offense against Allah. All Muslims must support the political action of jihad. This may take several forms—fighting, proselytizing or contributing money.
The Trilogy lays out the complete strategy, tactics, and vision of political Islam and jihad. Most of the Trilogy is about how Mohammed dealt with those people who disagreed with him. Over half of the Koran is about how to treat the Free. Violent political action with a religious motivation was taken against non-Muslims. Under Islam, their only route to political freedom was to submit. This legal inferiority of the Free is sacred, eternal, and universal.
Duality of ethics was the basis for Mohammed’s greatest single innovation—jihad. Jihad is dual ethics with sacred violence. The key religious element of the dual ethics is that Allah sanctifies violence for complete domination. A non-Muslim must submit to Islam.
Jihad as Civilizational War
Jihad uses every aspect of civilization as an element of war. Violence, education, fear, psychology, sociology, sex, population, immigration, public relations, corruption, and religion are all used in jihad. Military force and terror are the smallest aspects of jihad. The second reason that jihad is civilizational war is that the purpose of jihad is to annihilate every aspect of the non-Islamic civilization. Every single detail of a culture must become Islamic.
The greatest error in understanding jihad is to think of military force and terror. Jihad does not have to fit the Geneva Convention’s rules. A jihadist is a civilian in the army of Allah and can move back and forth from soldier to citizen. Giving money to an Islamic “charity” is jihad. Writing a letter to the editor about how well Islam treats women is jihad. Having eight Muslim children is jihad.
The Koran could not be more clear—every Muslim is to be a jihadist. Jihad is laid out in all three of the Trilogy texts. There is no Islam without jihad.
Islam has been waging civilizational war for centuries. Before the Muslims arrived, Egypt and North Africa and the southern coast of the Mediterranean were Christian. There was a Buddhist monastery in Egypt. Turkey was Buddhist and Christian. Persia—now Iran—was Zoroastrian. The Hindu culture covered an area of the world twice as large as it is now.
When Napoleon invaded Egypt, he discovered that the Muslim population knew nothing about Egypt before Islam. The 5,000-year-old culture of the Pharaohs had been annihilated. There are no Buddhists in Afghanistan. Baghdad was once home to the oldest community of Jews in the world, brought there as Babylonian captives. Today it is estimated that there are no more than a few dozen Jews left in Iraq. All cultures living within the borders of Islam are annihilated. People either leave, convert or die. Languages disappear to be replaced by Arabic. There are no exceptions over time.
Once jihad has conquered a civilization, there is never another revolution. Even if the form of government changes, it remains Muslim. The only time Islam has left an occupied territory has been because it was forced out by an outside army.
Rape as Warfare
Mohammed encouraged the rape of female captives after battles. This is reported in the Sira and Hadith and approved in the Koran. In the ethics of jihad it is not considered rape to have forced sex with a woman as long as she is a non-Muslim captive or slave. This is true even if she is married. In the Muslim world, the act is rape when committed against a Muslim. Again, the dual ethics of Islam prevail. There is one rule for Muslims and another for the Free.
B3,34,431 One of the captives was a beautiful Jewess, Safiya. Dihya had her first, but she was given to Mohammed next.
4:24 Also forbidden to you are married women unless they are your slaves or captives.
Rape was one of Mohammed’s tactics of conquest because it worked. Forced sex with women whose protectors had been killed was supreme domination. If a woman is captured, raped and absorbed into the captor’s environment, her helplessness renders her totally compliant and her submission is complete. To protect her children from slavery, many widows and rape victims readily agreed to conversion and their children were raised as Muslims.
Forced sex is far more than rape in political Islam. It is a method of war, a tactical strike which is not a crime or sin because it is jihad. It is practiced against the unbeliever and is sanctioned in the Trilogy of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith.
Rape is pure dualistic ethics, one rule for Muslims and a second rule for the Free. Islamic ethics deny the Golden Rule.
The Tears of Jihad
These figures are a rough estimate of the death of non-Muslims through the political use of jihad.
Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa. About 25 million slaves were delivered to the market. But the wars to obtain slaves killed about 120 million, including the young, old, and sick left behind.
120 million Africans killed
The total number of Christians martyred by Islam is about 60 million.
60 million Christians killed
The country of India today is only half the size of ancient India, due to jihad.
80 million Hindus killed
Jihad killed the Buddhists in Turkey, Afghanistan, along the Silk Route, and in India. The total is roughly 10 million.
10 million Buddhists killed
Total 270,000,000 killed
This gives a rough estimate of 270 million killed by jihad.
The civilizational war of Islam against the ethics of unity has been very successful. Ethics of unity have been eliminated from North Africa, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Pakistan, Bangla Desh, Afghanistan, and Central Asia. Jihad works and works well.
Islamization of a Culture
The Sira gives a dynamic picture of how Islam enters a culture. When Mohammed started preaching in Mecca, he did not encounter animosity. Islam was first portrayed as a logical continuation of the native Arabic religions. Then Islam claimed to be a “brother religion” to Judaism. Next it became not just a better religion but the best, and all of the other religions were wrong. Islam was publicly confrontational, attacking every aspect of the host culture. Hostility developed between Islam and the Meccan culture of religious tolerance. The Meccans tried to placate the Muslims, but there could be no compromise. Islam turned increasingly to violence that culminated in a treaty of war with new allies in Medina.
When the Muslims emigrated to Medina, they were peaceful. But when the Jews said that Mohammed was not a prophet in the Jewish tradition, Islam became hostile. Up to this point, the process of Islam in Medina was the same as in Mecca.
The Muslims were very poor and there was little growth of the religion. In Medina Mohammed used jihad to obtain money and settle old scores with the Meccans who had never submitted to Islam. The solution was political—jihad against the Meccans, the Jews, and their neighbors. By jihad, political Islam conquered all of Arabia in nine years.
The Reform of Islam
When people first learn about the actual doctrine contained in the Trilogy, a frequent response is that Islam needs a reform similar to what Christianity went through over the last two centuries.
First, what does it matter if the religion reforms or not? It is the politics that produce fear.
The doctrine of Islam is proclaimed to be eternal, universal, and perfect. “Eternal” means unchanging and final. Mohammed is the final and last prophet of Allah. “Universal” means that is applies to all of the world and “perfect” means that the doctrine needs no change.
A huge problem with proposing Islamic reformation is the amount of political doctrine in the Trilogy. About 67% of the Koran of Mecca deals with punishing unbelievers for merely disagreeing with Mohammed. Over 50% of the Koran of Medina deals with hypocrites and jihad against unbelievers. Nearly 75% of the Sira deals with jihad. About 20% of the Hadith by Bukhari is about jihad. The majority of the doctrine is political and it is all violent. Removing this doctrine would destroy Islam. There is no Islam without politics. There is no such thing as a purely religious Islam.
And what body of Islam has the authority to reform it? There is no such authority. Some group of Muslims might decide to drop all of the violent and oppressive political doctrine, but what authority would they have to tell any other Muslim to follow them?
Why would any Muslim want reform? Demographic jihad (immigration and high birth rates) will cause Europe to be Islamic in less than a century. Islam is winning. Why reform a winner?
Islam is detailed down to the smallest action of life and living. This vast quantity of detail allows very little room for interpretation or change, let alone reformation.
There is the matter of Islamic dualistic ethics. How do you reform the ethical system that is at the core of Islam?
And lastly, Islam discourages criticism of another Muslim or the doctrine. There is no self-criticism of Islam, nor is it needed. How can there be reform without self-criticism?
The doctrine of Islam cannot be reformed any more than a triangle can be reformed by changing the number of sides. It is logically impossible. Islamic doctrine is defined as unchanging and beyond reform. The Koran is perfect and eternal. Mohammed is the final prophet and the ideal model for all humanity for all times. The reformation of political Islam is logically impossible due to the way the doctrine is defined.
The Real Islam
What is the real Islam? Radical Islam? Fundamentalist Islam? Moderate Islam? Meccan Islam? Medinan Islam? There is only one Islam. Islam is like a rainbow. Those who argue that the real Islam is moderate or that the real Islam is fundamentalist are like those who would say that a rainbow is red or green. A rainbow is not red, not green. No, a rainbow is all the colors. Islam is peaceful and violent. You can no more remove the aggression than you can remove the red from the rainbow. The Islamic political doctrine always has two choices because political Islam is profoundly dualistic.
The real Islam is the doctrine found in the Trilogy of Koran, Sira, and Hadith.
The information for the deaths by jihad are found in:
Thomas Sowell, Race and Culture, BasicBooks, 1994.
Woman’s Presbyterian Board of Missions, David Livingstone, 1888.
David B. Barrett, Todd M. Johnson, World Christian Trends AD 30-AD 2002, William Carey Library, 2001.
Koenard Elst, Negationism in India, Voice of India, New Delhi.
Therefore I say, “Know the enemy and know yourself. In a hundred battles
you will never be in peril.”
Sun Tsu, The Art of War
WHO ARE THE FREE?
The Free are those who are free of Mohammed and Allah. The Free are condemned to Islamic Hell because we don’t accept Mohammed as any kind of prophet or leader. We are the dhimmis, the slaves, and the slain of every continent.
Unfortunately, the Free are the ignorant, the unknowing, and the frightened. We are ignorant about the 270 million killed in the name of Allah. Consider:
Almost none of our diplomats and “experts” have ever read any of the Trilogy, nor were they taught the doctrine of political Islam in college.
Jews and Christians do not know about the Arabian Annihilation (the elimination of all Jews and Christians from Arabia).
People don’t know that white women were the slaves of choice among Muslims for 1,400 years.
Our media and intellectuals do not acknowledge rape of the Free as a weapon of war.
Christians don’t realize that they lost half their territory and 60 million people to Islam in Turkey, Syria, and North Africa.
Political Islam destroyed half of Hindu culture.
Political Islam annihilated most of Buddhist culture.
Islam destroyed all of the native religious culture of Africa in Islamic areas.
The theory and history of jihad are not taught in any military academy, foreign service school, or law enforcement school.
These facts about political Islam are like an elephant at a tea party. It’s not the elephant that is weird; what is weird is that no one refers to it.
What is significant about the Free, non-Muslim, response to Islam is the same: we have done nothing; we know nothing. It is this “nothing” that must be explained.
The Acceptance of Ignorance
We know more about Mars than we do political Islam. Mohammedans have been killing, enslaving, and raping for 1,400 years and we ignore it. Why don’t we even know we are ignorant? Denial. Profound denial.
We accept violence and fear from Islam. Any author who writes a book critical of Islam can share Salman Rushdie’s fate—a death sentence handed down by Islamic clerics. We don’t protest. We show no outrage. How can we have come to this? Have we no sense of decency left? No honor? No shame? No common sense?
Molestation of the Mind
The Free, non-Muslims, accept violence and threats from Islam without protest. This acceptance of violence is the sign of a profoundly molested psyche. The Free are like the battered wife and molested child of Islam.
Violent molestation can cause denial.
Islam’s explosive jihad destroyed half of Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Now let’s look at what manifests after violent molestation. The YWCA Rape Crisis Counselor Training Manual shows the following reactions are common among victims of rape and child molestation:
Disbelief: the victim has an incredibly hard time believing that the attacks took place.
The media reports very little of the jihad around the world and never connects the dots between the violent events.
Fear: fear is the tool that the abuser uses to control the victim.
Islam has used fear against the Free since day one. The first person Mohammed had assassinated was an artist who mocked him. Any public critic of Islam lives in fear.
Fear the attacker will return.
When will the next attack occur?
Guilt: the victim finds a way to blame himself/herself.
It is our fault. We have not treated Islam in the right way.
Branded: the victim does not want others to find out about the crime.
We do not teach the history of a million Europeans taken as slaves by Islam. We do not teach the history of the jihad against Hindus, Christians, or Buddhists.
Humiliation: the victim feels shamed. The things that led to the abuse are hard to talk about.
The victims of jihad in the American immigrant community do not want to talk about the brutality that made them flee to America. Survivors are not bold. They are a beaten people.
Lack of control: during the attack the victim was helpless. This helplessness extends to dealing with the problem.
Where is the person who is optimistic about what can be done to deal with political Islam?
Anger: anger toward the attacker can be healthy. But frequently the anger turns inward.
Notice the rage and hatred in politics since 9/11. Everything is personal, hateful, mean, and spiteful. We don’t discuss ideas; we assassinate character.
Powerlessness: things will not get better.
Pessimism about dealing with Islam is the note of the day.
The traits and characteristics of the abuser are well documented.
Denial: the abuser denies that the abuse ever took place.
Muslims do not acknowledge any of the crimes committed in the name of Islam. Anyone killed by jihad was killed in self-defense.
Inadequacy: Abusers are arrogant and overly self-confident.
Islam is never wrong. Muslims are the best of people according to the Koran.
The word islam means “submit.” The abuser expects submission on the part of the victim, the Free.
Inability to understand or recognize the problem: the abuser is the last person to admit he has a problem.
Islam has never accepted any responsibility for its 1400 year history of slavery.
Manipulation: the abuser wants to make the victim feel guilty.
Islam is presented as the victim. As an example, all of the Palestinians’ problems are caused by Israel.
Obsessed with weapons
Have you ever noticed all the swords on Islamic flags and seals? The AK-47 rifle is a symbol of Islam.
Christians as Islam’s Molested Children
The Free are all like molested children. Can we say that we fit the profile? Let’s look at Islam’s children one at a time and see how they manifest their abuse.
Political Islam used a sword to take over Syria, Egypt, North Africa, the Levant, and Turkey. Before jihad all of this territory was predominately orthodox Christian. The victims could convert or become dhimmis. (A dhimmi is a semi-slave. Dhimmis had no civil rights and paid special taxes.) This is still going on today. Over 2,000,000 Christians were killed and enslaved in Sudan in the 20th century alone.
What has the rest of Christianity had to say about the slaughter of the orthodox Christians? The great stain on Western Christianity is its denial of the suffering of its Orthodox and African brothers and sisters in Christ at the hands of the Muslims.
If you’re a Christian, do you know what happened to the Seven Churches of Asia mentioned in Paul’s letters? They were all destroyed by political Islam.
Christians are the abused children of Islam, due to their denial of suffering and apologies for Islam.
Jews as Islam’s Molested Children
When you read the Muslim accounts of jihad today it is very clear that jihad is happening in Israel, Iraq, Kashmir, Sudan—but the Jews don’t see it that way. They just have a “Palestinian problem,” not jihad.
Mohammed took the Jews’ god and children, murdered, enslaved, assassinated, and raped them. He exiled them, took their wealth, and then made the remaining Jews work the land that he stole from them. They also had to give him half of their profits. The Jews were the first dhimmis, semi-slaves.
The Jews have amnesia about the Islamic destruction of the Jews in Arabia. The amnesia extends to life as a dhimmi under Islam. They were the best second-class citizens in all of Islam and willingly submitted. Many Jewish intellectuals are the chief apologists for Islam today. Jews are the molested children of Islam.
Hindus as Islam’s Molested Children
In the first 6,000 years of Hindu culture, there was never a religious war. In about 1000 AD Islam started its massive killing, rape, theft, and cultural annihilation. Half the Hindu civilization was destroyed by Islamic imperialism.
In 1977, 2,000,000 Bengalis were murdered and 100,000 Hindu women raped. There are regular jihadic killings in the Kashmir region of India today.
Gandhi, the Hindu saint, showed himself to be a dhimmi in the partition of India. Much of India’s Muslim politics come from Gandhi’s idealistic pacifism and will result in the final collapse of India.
Most Hindus don’t want to talk about political Islam and struggle to make Gandhi’s pacifism work. Hindus are in a state of denial and are another of Islam’s molested children.
Buddhists as Islam’s Molested Children
Buddhist cultures do not survive when attacked. As a result, Buddhism is a very small religion. Buddhism would be the world’s second largest religion if it could resist aggression.
The first Western Buddhism was in what is now Afghanistan. The Buddhism in Afghanistan was practiced by Greeks who had come with Alexander the Great. There was also a strong Buddhist presence in Turkey and a Buddhist monastery in Alexandria, Egypt.
At one time the entire silk route was Buddhist. Political Islam struck and killed each and every pacifistic Buddhist. But do Buddhists remember? No. Do they want to know? No.
Currently Islam is destroying Buddhism in the Himalayas and mountainous areas northwest of India, in Bangladesh, and southeast Asia. Western Buddhists neither know nor care about this loss of Asian Buddhist culture. Knowing about it would only produce a helplessness since Buddhism limits what can be done against Islam or any other aggressor. In the political arena, Buddhists are all compassion and no wisdom.
Buddhists are profound deniers of jihad. Their pacifism will lead to the annihilation of Buddhism.
Intellectuals as Islam’s Molested Children
Since day one, the Western intellectual has been ineffectual in resisting Islam. The roots of Western thought about Islam are found in the rapid conquest of half of Western culture 1,400 areas ago. Jihad exploded when the Roman/Byzantine empire was in decay. The West, weak and enfeebled, reeled from overwhelming shock when its culture was destroyed, creating a foundation of fear and denial. This fear manifested in the failure of the Western intellectual to even name the enemy. When you read early Western accounts of that time, you never read of Islam or jihad. All references are to Arabs, Turks, and Moors. There was never a real understanding of political Islam’s foundations.
In the late 18th century scholars studied a weakened Islam that was exotic and romantic. Modern historians shows no horror at Islam’s bloodshed, rape, enslavement, and destruction of cultures. History almost seems written with the assistance of opiates; all the victims’ suffering is vague. The intellectuals are disconnected and in total denial. The Western attitude towards Islam results from an intellectual molestation.
In Foreign Affairs and other intellectual journals, the analysis of Islamic politics is devoid of any reference to the foundational documents of Islam, the history of jihad, and Islamic foreign policy. All the analysis is purely Western in nature and completely disregards the core values of Islamic politics. The only intellectual criticism is self-criticism, never criticism of political Islam.
Why have intellectuals sliced and diced the Bible and Christ but uttered nary a critical word about the Koran and Mohammed? Where is the technical and systemic analysis of the Koran as though it is just another historical document? Find one critical paper of thought about Islam at Harvard. Why are all university opinions of Islam written or vetted by Muslim scholars?
Every single artist and intellectual who opposed Mohammed was killed or fled Arabia. Intellectuals in both Europe and America have been threatened and murdered. Theo van Gogh, Pim Fortuyn, Salman Rushdie, the Danish Mohammed cartoonists and others are forgotten victims.
How refreshing it would be if even one college professor or media writer ever hinted that this type of action was wrong. How remarkable it would be if media criticized the Islamic threatening and killing of intellectuals. The Mohammed cartoon riots showed how afraid intellectuals are of Islam. They are willing to do anything to appease the abuser. If Islam objects to political cartoons then the media will find some imagined high moral ground in submitting to Islam’s demands to end freedom of the press.
The intellectuals of the Free are the molested children of Islam who deny the history of Islam and are ignorant of the doctrine of political Islam.
Blacks as Islam’s Molested Children
The accepted history of race in the U.S. is that white men captured Africans, brought them to the U.S. and sold them as slaves. Wrong. When the white slavers showed up on the west coast of Africa, they didn’t capture Africans. They looked them over in the pens, gave the African slave traders their money, got their bills of sale, and loaded their purchases into boats.
The African slave traders were Muslims. Their ancestors had been plying the trade of war, capture, enslavement, and sale for a thousand years. Mohammed was a slave trader. Long after the white slave traders quit, the Muslims continued their African slave trade up into the 21st century.
Islam is very clear about slavery. Mohammed was a slave trader and the survivors of jihad were war booty. The Hadith contains a full legal and philosophic system of slavery. The Hadith have many sacred examples of how the slaves were traded and what was done with the children, women (frequently raped), and men who survived. Muslims took slaves from all cultures.
Arabs have many words for slave. But Arabs have only one word for blacks—abid. The word serves for both black slave and African. Islam has another word for white slaves—mamluk. Arabic has more words for slaves than any other language.
Slavery is a constant image in the Koran and the Hadith. Mohammed called himself and his followers slaves of Allah. One of the most common Arab names is Abdullah, slave of Allah, Mohammed’s father’s name.
What about modern Africa? How can black leaders not see what is happening as Islam carries out its sacred violence? Why aren’t the black columnists, writers, professors, or ministers speaking out? They are in total denial. They are the molested children of Islam.
The one thing whites and blacks have in common is that their ancestors were enslaved by Islam, and both are too ashamed to admit it. Molested black and white children of Islam—a secret shame.
Blacks, whites, Christians, Jews, atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, artists, intellectuals, and animists have all been brutalized by jihad and political Islam. Their reactions have all been identical to that of an abused child. Each and every one denies the events, refuses to teach the history, are profoundly ashamed, and try to placate the abuser—Islam. The doctrine of political Islam is not taught in any institution. Each group of victims knows almost nothing about the other’s suffering.
All are afraid and even more afraid to admit it.
People from a culture with an ethics of unity find it almost impossible to understand Islam with its dualistic ethics.
Today the formal political status of dhimmi (a semi-slave who serves Islam) has been replaced by dhimmitude, the intellectual submission to Islam.
One dhimmi characteristic is to try to make the situation with Islam better. This is done by completely denying current events and arguing that Islam can be reformed or is not really so bad.
Another characteristic of the dhimmi is to attack those who should be allied with him against political Islam. This is just one example: when Hindus are talking about jihad, they will frequently start to criticize Christians. But Hindus cannot survive political Islam without Christians as allies.
Historically, a dhimmi was forbidden to study the Koran. The chief mark of dhimmitude today is ignorance of the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith.
Politicians, intellectuals, and media never mention the political doctrine in the Trilogy. The media discusses Islam in terms of political correctness and multiculturalism. History courses don’t teach about the civilizational annihilation due to jihad. Black history doesn’t refer to the 120,000,000 Africans destroyed over 1,400 years of jihadic predation that fed the slave trade up to today. Religious leaders placate imams in public gatherings and have no knowledge what the imam actually thinks of them or their religion. Political thinkers do not even know that political Islam exists.
The problem with this ignorance is that our leaders are unable to help us. They do not understand that Islam is a civilization based upon the ideal of dualism; whereas, our civilization is based upon the ideal of the ethics of unity. Our intellectuals cannot explain what this difference has meant in the past or what it will mean for our future.
In order for our civilization to survive, our leaders must understand the Trilogy and its impact. They must learn to think outside the politically correct, multicultural box of our media and universities. They must learn to connect the dots and see the systemic pattern of events based upon the Trilogy. The events of 9/11, the Mohammed cartoon riots, the London bombings, beheadings in Baghdad, the death fatwah against Salman Rushdie, and the killing of Daniel Pearl are all based upon the Trilogy. Know the Trilogy. Know Islam.
The Good Muslim
Here is the theory of the “good” Muslim. There are good Muslims and extremist Muslims. You can’t judge Islam by a few extremists or even a lot of terrorists.
There are 1.3 billion Muslims. If you are going to measure Islam by individuals you will have to meet and talk with a lot of them, not just the handful you may know. However, the doctrine is the same everywhere and is constant over time. Every Muslim can interpret the doctrine as they see fit, so Muslims differ. But in the end, every Muslim is driven by the doctrine.
It is the whole of Islam that we must measure. Even in Mohammed’s day of full jihad, only some of the Muslims were out killing, stealing, raping, assassinating, slaving, kidnapping, and terrorizing. Others were back at home, doing whatever one does at home.
It has never been that every Muslim was a jihadist. But at any time that is always an option. Jihad is always an option for every Muslim.
But let’s talk about Ahmed, the good Muslim you work with. Ahmed is a professional engineer. He says that terrorists are not real Muslims. His wife does not wear a burka.
So yes, Ahmed, the professional engineer at work, is a nice man. Where he differs from the nice Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, or atheist, however, is that Ahmed has another ethical option open at all times.
Note that a good Muslim is commanded 14 times in the Koran to remember that a Muslim is not actually a friend to the Free. To the extent that Ahmed is your friend, he is not a Muslim. To the extent that Ahmed is a Muslim, he is not your friend. After all, you are kafir.
3:28 Believers should not take unbelievers as friends in preference to other believers. Those who do this will have none of Allah’s protection and will only have themselves as guards. Allah warns you to fear Him for all will return to Him.
Mohammed is the perfect model for a Muslim. Mohammed’s uncle adopted him, raised him, taught him the trade of being a businessman, and protected him from harm. But his uncle never converted and Mohammed cursed him to Hell when he would not convert on his deathbed. Mohammed would be friendly to try to convert or get a favor, but he never, ever favored a non-Muslim over a Muslim. He was never an actual friend to a kafir.
At any time that it is needed to advance Islam, Ahmed may be deceitful. He will give money to Islamic charities that fund jihad. In political matters he will always come down on the side of Islam. And he will say that a terrorist is not a real Muslim. But according to the doctrine of political Islam both the terrorist and Ahmed are real Muslims.
The same person can use either the Koran of Mecca or the Koran of Medina when needed. Islam will now and forever contain “good” Muslims who are kind and “bad” Muslims who are oppressive and confrontational. The dualistic doctrine of the Trilogy does not allow just “good” Muslims.
Within the secret heart of every “good” Muslim is the Koran of Medina and jihad. Ahmed’s constant desire is to be more like Mohammed, who never had a non-Muslim friend. Ahmed will always be one of those “moderate” Muslims who do not rise up and condemn or “rat out” the terrorists. And at all times and in all ways, Ahmed will support Islamization of our culture.
This problem of friendship is at the heart of the evil of dualistic ethics. Those who follow the Golden Rule, the ethics of unity, find this hard to understand. The Free just cannot believe that someone with dualistic ethics is only being friendly, not a real friend. Ahmed, the person, may actually be your friend. But, Ahmed, the Muslim, is forbidden to be your true friend.
The Near Enemy
We have two sets of enemies. The far enemy is the politics of Islam. The near enemies are the dhimmi apologists, fueled by ignorance, multiculturalism, and political correctness.
Our universities present Islamic history as a glorious triumph. Humanity’s greatest moment came in the Islamic golden age. The Crusades were Western evil. Cultural self-loathing manifests in showing the history of the West as oppression and Islam is liberating. Women’s oppression under Islam is seldom discussed in feminist classes. Israel is condemned and jihadists are presented as “freedom fighters”. Christianity is criticized, Islam is praised.
The news media rarely publishes anything about the Islamic doctrine. Most Islamic terror is never mentioned. The dots are never connected. Each event of Islamic violence is seen on its own and never as part of a pattern. The media love to follow up any bad news about Islam with Muslims speaking “nice” about Islam.
The near enemy finds good reasons not to publish Mohammed cartoons, and find reasons to feel good about being a dhimmi. The near enemy enforces a public policy of political correctness and multiculturalism that declares criticism of Islam to be racist.
Our near enemies have a solution for Islam. War is evil and causes suffering. If you treat people well, they will treat you well. This is a logical fallacy. That is true, if and only if, they also follow the Golden Rule.
So if the Golden Rule inspires you to be non-violent, and if the person you are dealing with also practices the Golden Rule, all is fine. But if the other person doesn’t follow the Golden Rule, then they can take advantage of you.
For instance, Buddhist strictly followed the Golden Rule when Islam invaded. Pacifism allowed Islam to destroy all of Buddhism in Central Asia.
Pacifism in the face of political Islam will annihilate the culture of the Free as well.
Politics is a matter of perception. What pacifists don’t know is that Islam does not see them as kind and reasonable people, but as dhimmis. Dhimmis are indistinguishable from pacifists. They both submit to Islam.
An Ethical Basis for War
Let’s define the situation:
Islam has a dualistic ethical system that denies the equality of humanity. It divides all the world into believers and non-believers and has different rules for each.
Islam has an eternal, universal mandate to annihilate all other political systems.
Intimidation, demands, and violence may be used against the Free.
270,000,000 of the Free have been killed by political Islam.
Over half of Buddhism, Christianity, and Hinduism have been annihilated by political Islam.
Islam cannot be reformed.
Compromise is only a step towards dhimmitude.
There is no compromise that is logically possible between dualistic ethics and ethics of unity. There is no halfway point between honesty and deceit, freedom and slavery, equality and dhimmitude.
So the choice is between submission and annihilation or war and freedom. The third choice is dhimmitude, or a slow death, since every dhimmi population becomes Islamic over time.
To preserve our ethical civilization we must defeat political Islam. The question is: how shall we conduct this war?
Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, Prometheus Books, 2006.
Giles Milton, White Gold, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2004.
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack your enemy’s strategy.
Sun Tsu, The Art of War
A WAY TO REMAIN FREE
Before we discuss strategy, we must declare our moral purpose. Our moral purpose is to defend the very existence of the culture of the Golden Rule, an ethical civilization, from the 1,400-year assault by the dualistic ethics of political Islam. We must stop the continued killing of the Free, the enslavement of humanity and the spread of terror by Islam.
Islam represents 20% of the world’s population and is growing. Islam is united, has a vision, a strategy, and successful tactics.
Political correctness and multi-culturalism rule our world. Our government will not help in this war and instead gives aid and comfort to the “minority” Muslims. Our government is staffed by multiculturalists who will give every edge to Muslims. Our universities have been occupied by the Muslim Brotherhood and the dhimmi, leftist professors.
The Free are divided into Christian, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, conservative, and liberal. Each of the divisions has further divisions. The relations between the groups is marked by historical rivalries and hatreds. No group comprehends the suffering of others at the hands of Islam.
So not only do none of the victims know their own story, they do not know the story of the others.
The Muslims have a great momentum. They are taking over by birth and immigration. We have fewer children while Muslims have huge families. Osama bin Laden has 53 children. Demographic statistics show that France will become Islamic in the year 2020. Run the population numbers.
Islam knows us well. Islam knows our history, secret shame, rivalries, hatreds, weaknesses, and divisions. The Free don’t know anything about Islam. We may fear and dislike it but that is just “feelings”, not knowledge. Our so-called experts (none of whom know the actual doctrine of political Islam) make apologies and tell us that all of Islam’s problems are caused by our poor governmental policies.
We are filled with cultural self-loathing, demoralized, fatalistic, nihilistic, too fat, and too rich. (Wealthy people are weak at war, they have too much to protect.) We have lost the mind of war and feel that “peace” is the moral high ground. We are pacifists in the face of jihad. Our artists praise the virtues of peace with no knowledge about what happens when peaceful people are vanquished.
A Strategy for the Weak
At this stage of our intellectual and emotional development, our strategies are limited. We are too weak and divided to attack Islam.
Islam is united and we are individuals. Since an individual cannot beat a community, we must build a community, become politically active, and know who our allies are.
We are ignorant and must learn the doctrine of political Islam, the far enemy. We must know the enemy.
The thought of actually attacking Islam is too frightening at this stage of the game. But we can attack the near enemy, Islam’s allies.
So we have a slogan for our opening strategy:
Build community. Know the far enemy. Attack the near enemy.
We must form ourselves into a community whose only purpose is to preserve and save our ethical civilization. We must make ourselves conscious of who we are or we will lose.
When the Orthodox church in Bethlehem was destroyed by the Palestinian jihadists in 2002, no one protested. The American Christians did not protest, the Hindus did not protest, the Jews not protest, nor did the news media protest.
But when a mosque in Iraq got hit by American fire, everyone knew it. All of Islam protested, along with their apologist allies. Why? The Muslims are organized. The Free do not even know who they are.
This must change.
Web site community
We have hundreds of Web sites that speak out against Islam. Each stands alone. These must become a part of a larger community.
The different sites have links to other sites, but each site is an island unto itself. Imagine that all of the anti-Islamic sites were members of a community that used a list-serve to link up all the sites. In this way, Web site owners could communicate among themselves. We could mobilize, focus, and coordinate tactics during special times such as the Mohammed cartoon attacks.
There are articles and information that could be published at the same time on many Web sites. For instance, if this pamphlet were to be spread by the site list-serve to all the other sites, then it could be read simultaneously across the globe. There is a much better strategic impact from speed across a broad front. Also, simultaneous publishing allows a security. It would be difficult to find the origin and it would not be practical to hack all the sites.
And who knows what else can happen as site owners communicate with each other?
We must know more people from our own neighborhoods and groups. At this time most people personally know only a few people from church or another social group who are working in some way against Islam. If you want to meet someone else from your town how would you do it?
We must use the Web so that we can easily meet people from our cities and neighborhoods. If we are a writers, scholars, translators, truckers, Christians, or jihad history buffs, we need a way to form personal communities.
All of these personal communities can be started using the Web to find each other.
The Swarm Community
We Free usually act as individuals, but we must have ways to unite and attack as a pack or swarm. Islam does this with great effect. When they need e-mails or phone calls, they use the Islamic community, not individuals.
Swarm software would link a community of intellectual warriors with projects. As an example, a project could be to protest the way an event was portrayed in news media.
You feel helpless and afraid. Everything about the way our government deals with political Islam seems wrong, but no one in the media or government will provide guidance on how to protect our very civilization.
Multi-culturalism says that even wanting to preserve your culture is biased thinking. Political correctness says that any talk about Islam that is negative or judgmental is hate speech or racist.
We really don’t even know exactly what it is we are losing, but we are losing. We are losing a war that we are not allowed to speak of.
We must form a grass-roots political community. We need ways to teach people what is happening with Islam in every area of our lives. Education, politics, customs, medicine, art, law, and funding will all have demands on them to be more Islamic.
On a national level Saudi Arabia and other Islamic nations spend billions of dollars each year to spread Islam in the U.S. And what do we have to oppose this multi-billion dollar political organization with a 40-year head start? All we have is a few volunteers with no budget and no support.
Who is going to win?
We must develop national organizations that can support local politics. We must lobby about national issues such as immigration and the massive Federal welfare programs for Muslims.
This means money. We must move from amateur status to professional status through fund-raising.
Friends and Allies
The Free are divided with many historical rivalries. Hindus dislike Christians who try to convert them. The rift between Jews and Christians is an old one. The Left is plagued by cultural self-loathing and disdain of Christians. The Left and the Right would rather savage each other that deal with a common enemy. Such is the nature of humanity. This is no problem, except for one thing, these rivalries prevent us from working together against our enemy, political Islam.
We must see the difference between a friend and an ally. We don’t have to be friends. We don’t even have to like each other. America and Russia were allies during World War II, but were never friends. We worked together for a common cause.
Let’s take a real life example from the viewpoint of a Hindu. The Dalai Lama went to see the Pope at the Vatican in 2006 to talk about Islam. This was after the Pope had quoted a Byzantine priest who criticized Islam as being violent. Islam responded by rioting and killing.
Now the Dalai Lama is viewed as a friend by Hindus and the Pope is one of the hated Christians. But the Dalai Lama told the Pope that he should not stir up the Muslims and those “mischievous” jihadists. Mischievous? That is what you call a child who deliberately does something wrong. But for the Dalai Lama, killing and raping a nun is called “mischievous”. The Dalai Lama is a dhimmi and the near enemy.
So, in actual fact, the Dalai Lama is a friend to the Hindus and an ally of Islam. The Pope is not a friend of the Hindus, but he is an ally against Islam.
We need to realize that Islam will destroy the Dalai Lama, the Pope, and the rest of us. We must become allies or our civilization of the Free will be annihilated like the Hindu civilization in Pakistan or the Christian civilization in Turkey.
To heal our rivalries, we need to develop Ambassadors. An Ambassador is armed with the truth about the doctrine of political Islam and its history of annihilation. They also know every groups’ secret shame. An Ambassador represents one group to another for the purpose of making alliances between rival groups of Free.
Ambassadors set up frank discussions, not dialogs, between groups to strengthen alliances. If friendships are established, fine, but making allies is the point.
Know the Far Enemy
There is one solid, simple ground on which to discuss Islam—its political doctrine as found in the Trilogy. It has many tactical advantages.
Its facts can’t be challenged or denied. Any arguments based upon doctrine can’t be trumped. You can speak with absolute confidence.
By definition, the doctrine is the real Islam.
The actual doctrine has now been made simple and is easily learned [see the Book List on the last page].
Islam never deviates from its “playbook” doctrine. Hence, it is easy to understand what they do and what they will do next.
You are bigot-proof. This entire work is based upon political doctrine. Not one Muslim is criticized.
You can’t be called a bigot in saying what Mohammed did and discussing politics.
The facts of the doctrine are shocking and repulsive.
You can win any debate with an apologist or Muslim by constantly returning to the doctrine. As long as you discuss doctrine you are winning. So when the apologist discusses how bad the policies of the Free are, how bad Christians are, or how they know a “good” Muslim; bring the talk back to the doctrine. You win.
The doctrine gives us the accurate language instead of multicultural, politically correct, media language.
The Doctrine Project
The doctrine of political Islam is not common knowledge. How can we come to common solutions if we don’t have common knowledge?
We must master the doctrine ourselves. It gives great power in thinking strategically and tactically. Knowing the doctrine makes you a powerful debater and teacher.
We need to sponsor training sessions for ourselves. Some people can learn from reading alone, but others need a group to assist them. The trainings must also include how to use argument and persuasion to defend our civilization.
Spreading the Doctrine
We must use the Islamic political doctrine to our advantage. We must put the doctrine in front of:
Opinion makers in the media and universities
Military, law enforcement and intelligence officers
Bloggers and others active on the Web
Other opinion makers
This list divides itself into those we need to see in person and those we can reach by e-mail or phone. Political leaders fall into the category of personal visitation. Committees must contact and educate officials about the doctrine of political Islam. We should set a goal of a meeting with every Congressman, Senator, and every governor. At the meeting we should express our fear of political Islam and our fear of officials’ ignorance of Islam. The ignorance can be eliminated by reading the books detailing the doctrine.
Others should be contacted by e-mail or letter and given a chance to receive the gift of books detailing the doctrine of political Islam and its history.
We must let Mohammed speak for himself to the leaders, officials, and others.
The Curriculum Project
Our public officials, diplomats, military, and the media are all advised and trained by the Middle East experts in our universities. The ideology of the universities is driven by explaining everything about Islam by its reaction to us. The political doctrine of Islam is never used to explain what is happening or predict what will happen.
A computer search of a dozen universities that have Middle East degree programs showed that not one degree program teaches the political doctrine of Islam. Their graduates study Arabic language, Arabic literature, architecture, and history. This is illogical. A graduate of these programs can advise officials and never have the slightest clue as to what motivates Islam.
But one of the things that motivates our university elites is race and money. It goes like this: about 30 years ago Saudi Arabia started pouring money into our top universities. They funded chairs, gave donations to the departments, and built buildings. But then came demands. Islamic departments must not be headed by white, non-Muslim scholars. So Muslim scholars became the ideological drivers in the university system. And the professors deferred in all ideological demands. They serve Islam as self-loathing dhimmis.
So whatever Islam wants, Islam gets at Harvard and other universities. We are betrayed. Many of the universities are the near enemy.
Every act and word by Islam starts with the Koran and the Sunna. It is impossible to ever understand Islam without knowing its view and motivation. So it follows that the doctrine of political Islam must be added to the knowledge-base that is required of every.
We must create and implement curriculums at courageous schools that will teach a program based upon the actual doctrine of Islam. We must educate students who can debate and write based upon the Islamic Trilogy. We must dominate the market place of ideas and produce young minds that are not dhimmi-ized.
This would be a rigorous academic curriculum. Graduates could read Arabic, know the Koran, Sira, and Hadith. The history of the Islamic conquest of the universal ethical civilization would be studied. They would know the suffering of the dhimmi. Since they must be warriors, they must also study writing, speaking, logic, and persuasion.
Curriculum at Public Schools
Every public school textbook that mentions Islamic history has been vetted by CAIR (a Hamas “civil rights” organization). To counter this we must lobby to have the history of the victims of jihad and dhimmitude be added to textbooks. We must let the pain of our ancestors be known.
Slavery and Curriculum
Every slave sold in America was wholesaled out of a Islamic slave system that had been in existence a thousand years before they started selling Africans to the Europeans. And Islam enslaved a million Europeans.
All of this history must be added to the public school curriculum. Islam must bear the historical burden that it deserves.
Islam has a large body of doctrine about how to subjugate women. However, feminist studies never take a critical look at the doctrine. We must find ways to ensure that Islam’s doctrine about women is taught.
The Translation Project
We must use two sources to recover the lost history of the victims of jihad. There are some valuable out-of-print books that need reissuing. A second source of history is translating books from other languages.
The out-of-print and foreign language books are the low-hanging fruit and easily picked. But there is another source of books—graduate students. Graduate students need thesis projects for masters and doctoral work.
For a very small budget we can advertise grants and get top quality students to work and recover lost history. As an example, we could get African studies students to do work on the Islamic contributions to slave history.
The Tears of Jihad
We need to attack Islam along two fronts. The first is its political doctrine and the second is the history of its victims. Our ancestors have suffered too much to be thrown on the trash heap of history.
In Muslim countries, the population of the Free is dropping like a rock. Countries that had a significant Free population a century ago now have almost none. There are a handful of Jews left
in Iraq. The people of the pharaohs, the Copts, are now only about 8% of Egypt’s population. Where did they go? They converted or went to the West.
The refugees from jihad here in America are invisible. No one wants to know their history or horror. The growth of political Islam by jihad causes terrible suffering for the persecuted. Not only are their families and friends gone, but their cultures are gone too.
The first tragedy thrust upon these refugees is to be persecuted because they are not Muslim. The second tragedy is that no one wants to hear their stories. We must record their suffering to honor the dead and for use as weapons of war against Islamic imperialism.
The Ambassadors of Tears
No group has a clear history of jihad. One of the ways this manifests is that our young are only being taught a politically correct Islamicized version of history. Even those who do know their own history of jihad do not know the history of other groups. Therefore, we need Ambassadors to other persecuted groups and our own youth.
Young Jews, for instance, must know not only their own history of dhimmitude, but also they need to hear from Hindus and Christians about their history as dhimmis, their slavery, and deaths. We need to have scholars to teach everyone. This cross-cultural teaching can strengthen alliances and encourage others to recover their own suffering.
The Status of the Far Enemy
At this time, not one element of this strategy has been implemented at any real political level. However, political Islam has every single element of their strategy in place at the global, national, state, and local level.
Attack the Near Enemy
The Media and the Swarm
The news media is filled with misinformation about Islam. We must use letters-to-the-editor and guest columnists to correct and educate.
The letters to the media are an opportunity to be clever and harness all of our energies. In any such project we are faced with two limitations. We are largely ignorant, that is, we don’t have that many people who could be called warrior scholars. The second limitation is that we are not a community. Most people are isolated. We miss opportunities to use the force of numbers.
Let’s take an example: in 2006 in Minnesota Somali taxi cab drivers said that they did not want to carry passengers with bottles of alcohol from the airport. The airport authority was going to compromise with the Muslims, but they got over 400 e-mails from all over the nation protesting the creation of a separate level of laws for Islam.
One e-mail, no matter how well written, does not have the influence of 400 e-mails. We need a way to:
Create a community of scholar warriors
Select strategic and tactical targets
Launch mass attacks against a target
The Swarm software [mentioned on page 35] would help do all of the above. We must learn to work together as an army of scholar warriors.
We must develop a culture of film, video, and audio propaganda. Books are necessary, but we must also have other sources of information.
We must build a media community that can implement our strategy of building community, knowing the far enemy and attacking the near enemy.
This means that we need to build a film, video, and audio culture to produce war propaganda.
We must also prepare propaganda that is directed towards the ordinary person. Most of the books written today are for the intellectuals.
Changing the Language
All of the names and terms used by Islam come from the Trilogy, but the Free don’t use these terms or names.
The jihad of Umar burst out of Arabia and crushed the Christian world of Syria, Egypt, and the rest of the Middle East. The Christians recorded it as an Arabic war. When Islam invaded Europe, Europeans called it a Turkish invasion. The jihad against Christian Spain was an invasion by the Moors. The Muslims called these events jihad.
In the early nineteenth century America sent the Navy and Marines to war against the Barbary pirates in North Africa. But the Muslims never called their naval raiders “Barbary pirates.” They called them ghazis, sacred raiders. Naming them pirates showed that the the Free had no idea about the doctrine and history of Islam.
Look at the news today. The media report an intifada, an uprising, by the Palestinians against the Israelis. But the terms intifada, Palestinian, and Israeli are misnomers. The truer terms are jihad, Muslim, and infidel, if we follow the Koran. The doctrine of political Islam clearly states that jihad is to be waged by all Muslims against all Jews and other “unbelievers.” Today is no different from 1,400 years ago in Islam.
The events of 9/11are recorded in the West as an attack by terrorists. Mohammed Atta, the leader of the 9/11 attack, was a pious Muslim. He left a letter clearly stating his intentions: 9/11 was pure jihad. An terror attack is a tactic, but jihad is a 1,400-year continuous process. Therefore, a terrorist attack is not the same as jihad.
Muslims’ terms for their actions connect events and people with Islamic history and doctrine and show a continuing process. Non-Muslim terms are misnomers, do not connect events, and show no meaning of historic process.
The only correct terms are those of Islam. The naming by the unbelievers is wrong because the naming is a projection of Western culture. Correct naming comes from Islam and leads to correct thinking.
This collection of tactics is incomplete, but is a place to start.
For 1,400 years Islam has won a declared war against the rest of humanity. For 1,400 years we have tried the strategy of appeasement. We refuse to believe the doctrine of political Islam or its dualistic ethics. We deny its existence and truth.
For 1,400 years dhimmis have believed that some form of defensive coexistence can work. A defensive war against Islam has never worked and it won’t work now. We cannot fight a defensive war to hold what we have. The war must be offensive and fought with the idea of defeating Islam.
Islam’s power grows daily. Our government will not go to war against political Islam, but actually aids its growth through welfare, immigration, and civil rights legislation.
For five years since 9/11, individuals have studied Islam, but the time for individual effort is past. Those few who understand Islam must band together to form community, know the far enemy, and attack the near enemy.
It is simple. Fight or lose our civilization. Denial and pacifism are death of both self and civilization.
The Poverty of Islam
Only the land of Islam—dar al Islam—is real to a Muslim. As an example of how self-centered Islam is, only 210 books per year are translated into Arabic—the same number of books translated into Lithuanian. There has never been a best selling novel that has been translated into Arabic. Why are so few books translated? From an Islamic standpoint the books are not needed. They are not Islam; they are not necessary. The books have no real knowledge in them.
Not one Nobel prize in the sciences has been awarded to anyone in the Islamic world—eight prizes have been awarded to Muslim scientists who worked in the West with Western partners. Their work took place outside of Islamic culture. For perspective, look at how many prizes have been awarded to tiny Scotland: 32.
The total economic output (not counting oil revenues) of the Islamic world equals that of Finland. The extreme poverty of Islamic economics must be explained. Mohammed’s sacred economic example was to violently take the non-Muslim’s wealth. Mohammed did not create wealth. He took it.
Dual ethics leads to a culture of slyness and deceit that hurts business. Once you can treat the “other” badly, you have learned how to treat your brother badly.
The Koranic doctrine leads to fatalism—a poor business principle. Fatalism is the opposite of creativity, initiative and hard work.
Theft, deceit, and fatalism all lead to poverty.
The great majority of the wealth and intellectual power of Islam’s golden age came from its dhimmi subjects. As more and more of the dhimmis converted to Islam the wealth and intellectual vigor declined. All of these books are available on amazon.com.
Sira—the life of Mohammed
The accessible works are:
Mohammed and the Unbelievers, Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2006.
Spencer, Robert. The Truth about Muhammad. Regnery Publishing, 2006
The definitive work:
Guillaume, A. The Life of Muhammad, (Ishaq’s—Sirat Rasul Allah). Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 1967
Hadith—the Traditions of Mohammed
The Political Traditions of Mohammed, Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2006
The Hadith of Abu Al-Bukhari, Sahih Bukhari is best found on the internet. The University of Southern California (http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/) is one of the best sites.
The Koran you can read and understand is:
A Simple Koran, Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2006.
History of Jihad
Bostom, Andrew. The Legacy of Jihad. Prometheus Books, 2006.
Best One Book Source
Warraq, Ibn. Why I Am Not a Muslim. Prometheus Books, 1999.
dhimmi The first dhimmis were the Jews, who gave Mohammed all of their land and goods and then agreed to give him half of their crops. Hence, a non-Muslim who accepts the dominance of Islam in politics is a dhimmi.
fatwah A legal judgment by Islamic clerics.
Free Anyone who does not believe in Mohammed. One who is free of Allah.
Hadith A collection of the sayings and actions of Mohammed
kafir Anyone who does not believe in Allah and Mohammed, a Free, a non-believer
Sira The biography of Mohammed by Ibn Ishaq.
Sunna The words and deeds of Mohammed, found in the Sira and Hadith.
Trilogy Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed), Hadith (Traditions of Mohammed).