Islam is the Enemy of Freedom

Islam is the Enemy of Freedom

A great irony of the age is that the seemingly most diehard proponents of freedom— the useful idiots   of our time—are the most dangerous unwitting accomplices of liberty’s enemy—Islam. Keep in mind that the very name “Islam” is a derivation of “taslim,” the Arabic word for “surrender,” surrender to the will and dictates of Allah as revealed by Muhammad and recorded in the Quran.
This non-negotiable surrender to Islam requires the individual as well as the society to disenfranchise themselves of many of the fundamental and deeply cherished human rights.
Below is a brief presentation of what this surrender to Islam entails and why it is imperative that all freedom-loving people arise and defeat the menace of Islamofascism.
Amendment I of the Bill of Rights enshrines some of the most cherished ideals of freedom-loving people:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Islam considers itself the three branches of government. It enacts laws as it sees fit, adjudicates laws, and executes as it deems. Islam is anathema to the provisions of the First Amendment and much more.
  • Islam proclaims itself as the only legitimate religion for the entire world, grudgingly granting minor recognition to Judaism and Christianity from whom it has liberally plagiarized many of its dogma. Jews and Christians are allowed to live under the rule of Islam as dhimmis and must pay a special religious tax of jazyyeh. Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, Baha’is, members of other religions, agnostics, or atheists are not even allowed to live practicing their belief or disbelief.
  • Islam actively suppresses and even prohibits the practice of other religions, including those of the “people of the book,” Jews and Christians. There is not a single church or synagogue in the cradle of Islam, Saudi Arabia, while thousands of mosques dot the tolerating and welcoming non-Moslem lands. Islamic countries that allow for Jewish and Christian places of worship subject these “people of the book” to numberless subtle and not-so-subtle forms of persecution. Moslems in non-Moslem lands proselytize relentlessly and convert others while any Moslem who leaves Islam is judged as apostate and automatically condemned to death.
  • Freedom of speech is just about non-existent in Islam. The word is Allah’s, his chosen divines such as Ayatollahs and Imams are the only ones who are to make pronouncements squarely-based on Allah’s word, the Quran. Any expression in the least at deviance from the Quran, the Hadith and the edicts of Islamic high divines is heresy and severely punishable. Hence, stifling of free expression is the major mechanism by which the Islamic clergy retain power and prevent constructive change in Islamic societies.
  • Freedom of the press is completely alien to Islam, since a free press tends to express matters as it sees it, rather than as it is stated in the Quran. To Islam, the Quran is the press and the only press. There is no need for critical reporting, no need to present ideas that may conflict with the Quran, and no place for criticism of anything Islamic. The stranglehold of Islam on the individual and society is complete.
  • Peaceful assembly of the people is not allowed. The backward oppressive Islamic societies inflict great hardship on the citizenry and any assembly of the victims presents a threat to the suffocating rule. Islamic governments routinely prevent peaceful assemblies from taking place. Failing to do so, they unleash their hired thugs, the police and even the military against any assemblage no matter how peaceful and how legitimate is its grievance. The Islamic Republic of Iran which is vying with Saudi Arabia as the leader of true Islamic rule, routinely attacks any and all gatherings of its people, arrests them, imprisons them without due process, tortures them, and even executes them in secret dungeons. Journalists, academics, unionists, students, teachers, women rights groups who dare to petition the government for redress are labeled subversive and are severely punished.
  • Maltreatment of religious minorities and the non-religious is criminal indeed. In the Islamic Republic of Iran, for instance, the government has launched a systematic program of genocide against its largest religious minority—the Baha’is. The government is gathering a comprehensive list of Baha’is, their occupations, locations, properties and the like—action reminiscent of the Nazis. The government is banning Baha’i students from post high-school education unless they recant their religion, deprives them of engaging in numerous forms of occupations and trades, denies them from holding worship gatherings, razes their holy places and much more. The Islamic Republic of Iran is not satisfied with its cruel treatment of the living Baha’is and has launched a war on their dead by bulldozing Baha’i cemeteries in several cities. Thus is the rule of fundamental Islamism that is awaiting the complacent and snoozing world.
  • Oppression of women in general is tragic indeed. Men are allowed to have as many as four wives simultaneously and as many concubines as they wish or can afford. Men can easily divorce their wives and automatically have the custody of the children, if they so decide. Women have subservient status to men in all areas of the law. Equality under the law has no meaning in Islam. Just one example of the dreadful way of treating women in Islam is a case of a Saudi woman who was gang-raped. The Islamic court convicted the woman to prison term and lashes for having committed the “sin” of riding in a car with a male who was not her relative. This is a standard form of Islamic Shariah justice—a savage heritage of barbarism that ruled the Arabian Peninsula some centuries ago.
  • Islam has a solution for every “problem.” It deals with homosexuals, for instance, by hanging them en mass and gloating about it, even though homosexuality is just as prevalent in Islamic lands as anywhere else. Recently an Ayatollah made a ruling on homosexuals. He said that they should be tortured before they are hanged. In Islam the rulings of high-ranking clergy constitute the law and are binding.
  • Not only Islam does not allow freedom of assembly and the press, it is intrusively restrictive in every aspects of a person’s life. The way women should dress, the haircut of men, the music people are allowed, movies to watch, television programs to view, and even parties in the privacy of their home are subject to the ridiculous monitoring of moral police. Islam is hell-bent on outward morality and puritanical conduct while it is rotten to the core just below the pretentious surface.
  • Islam segregates by gender many public places and events such as beaches, sporting venues, public transportations, and even building elevators. Families are often prevented from attending a sporting event together or swimming together at a beach.
  • Egypt, the crown of the Arab-Islam world, demands that citizens declare Islam or only one of the two other religions, Jewish and Christianity, as their religion in order to receive the government-issued identity cards. ID cards are required for jobs, healthcare, education, a marriage license and a host of other things. If you are an agnostic, an atheist, a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Baha’i, you are forced to perjure yourself to receive the indispensable ID card. In a real sense, Islam the pretender of high moral ground compels people to lie in order to receive what is their birthright as citizens.
I have been sounding the alarm about Islam’s imminent deadly threat for a number of years. The Islamic treasury flush with oil extortion money together with the help of useful idiots is having the upper hand in this battle of survival for freedom. The slaveholder Islam has been transformed into a more virulent form of Islamofascism; it is an inveterate unrelenting enemy of freedom. We need to act now and stem the tide of this deadly threat. Tomorrow may be too late. Freedom is too precious to abandon through complacency, acts of political correctness, or outright cowardice. Contributing Editor Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at Amil Imani is the author of the smashing book Obama Meets Ahmadinejad.

Time to Unmask Muhammad

Time to Unmask Muhammad

Posted By Geert Wilders On March 31, 2011 @ 12:02 am In Daily Mailer,FrontPage | 38 Comments

Editor’s note: Below is an English translation of an op-ed piece that Geert Wilders published in the Dutch magazine “HP/De Tijd” on March 30, 2011.

To know why Islam is a mortal danger one must not only consider the  Koran but also the character of Muhammad, who conceived the Koran and  the entirety of Islam.

The Koran is not just a book. Muslims believe that Allah himself  wrote it and that it was dictated to Muhammad in the original version,  the Umm al-Kitab, which is kept on a table in heaven. Consequently one  cannot argue with the contents. Who would dare to disagree with what  Allah himself has written? This explains much of Muhammadan behaviour,  from the violence of jihad to the hatred and persecution of Jews,  Christians and other non-Muslims and apostates. What we in the West  regard as abnormal, is perfectly normal for Islam.

A second insuperable problem with Islam is the figure of Muhammad. He  is not just anyone. He is al-insan al-kamil, the perfect man. To become  a Muslim one must pronounce the Shahada (the Muslim creed). By  pronouncing the Shahada one testifies that there is no god that can be  worshipped except Allah, and one testifies that Muhammad is his servant  and messenger.

The Koran, and hence Allah, lays down that Muhammad’s life must be  imitated. The consequences of this are horrendous and can be witnessed  on a daily basis.

There has been much analysis of Muhammad’s mental sanity. In spite of  all the available research, it is rarely mentioned or debated. It is a  taboo to discuss the true nature of the man whom one and a half billion  Muslims around the world regard as a holy prophet and example to be  followed. That taboo must be breached in the West, and here in the  Netherlands.

Ali Sina is an Iranian ex-Muslim who established the organisation for  apostates of Islam Faith  Freedom International. In his latest book he  posits that Muhammad is a narcissist, a pedophile, a mass murderer, a  terrorist, a misogynist, a lecher, a cult leader, a madman, a rapist, a  torturer, an assassin and a looter.  Sina has offered 50,000 dollars  for the one who can prove otherwise. Nobody has claimed the reward as  yet. And no wonder, as the description is based on the Islamic texts  themselves, such as the hadiths, the descriptions of Muhammad’s life  from testimonies of contemporaries.

The historical Muhammad was the savage leader of a gang of robbers  from Medina. Without scruples they looted, raped and murdered. The  sources describe orgies of savagery where hundreds of people’s throats  were cut, hands and feet chopped off, eyes cut out, entire tribes  massacred. An example is the extinction of the Jewish Kurayza tribe in  Medina in 627. One of those who chopped off their heads was Muhammad.  The women and children were sold as slaves. Confronted with the lunacy  of Islamic terrorists today, it is not hard to find out where the lunacy  comes from.

In Vienna the women’s rights activist Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was  recently sentenced to paying a fine for insulting a religion by calling  Muhammad a pedophile. However, that is the truth. Numerous hadiths  contain testimonies by Muhammad’s favorite wife, the child wife Aisha.  Aisha literally says: “The prophet married me when I was six years old,  and had intercourse with me when I was nine.”


According to the historian Theophanes (752-817) Muhammad was an  epileptic. Epileptic crises are sometimes accompanied by hallucinations,  perspiration form the forehead and foaming at the mouth, the very  symptoms which Muhammad displayed during his visions.

In his book “The other Muhammad” (1992) the Flemish psychologist Dr.  Herman Somers concludes that in his forties the “prophet” began to  suffer from acromegaly, a condition caused by a tumor in the pituitary  gland, a small organ that is situated just below the brain. When the  tumor in the pituitary gland causes too much pressure in the brain,  people start to see and hear things that are not there. Somers’s  psychopathological diagnosis of Muhammad’s condition is: organic  hallucinatory affliction with paranoid characteristics.

The German medical historian Armin Geus speaks of a paranoid  hallucinatory schizophrenia. A similar analysis can be found in the book  “The Medical Case of Muhammad” by the physician Dede Korkut.

In his book “Psychology of Mohammed: Inside the Brain of a Prophet”  Dr. Masud Ansari calls Muhammad “the perfect personification of a  psychopath in power.” Muhammad had a unhinged paranoid personality with  an inferiority complex and megalomaniac tendencies. In his forties he  starts having visions that led him to believe he had a cosmic mission,  and that there was no stopping him.

The truth is not always pleasant or politically correct. On the basis  of the research referred to above it can be argued that the Islamic  creed obliges one and a half billion people around the world, including  the one million living in the Netherlands, to take Muhammad as their  example. There is no turning back once one has become a Muslim. For even  though article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states  that every person has the right to “change his religion or belief,” in  Islam there is a death penalty for leaving the faith.

Anyone who voices criticism of Islam and Muhammad is in grave  personal danger – as I have experienced. And whoever attempts to escape  from the influence of Islam and Muhammad risks death. We cannot continue  to accept this state of affairs. A public debate about the true nature  and character of Muhammad can provide insight and support to Muslims all  over the world who wish to leave Islam.

Apostates are heroes and more than ever they deserve the support of   freedom loving people all over the world. Party politics should not be  at play in this matter. It is time for us to help these people by  exposing Muhammad.

Geert Wilders is an MP in the Netherlands. He is the Chairman of the Party for Freedom (PVV).

Can Obama Lose?

Can Obama Lose?

Yes, but it will take a combination of three factors—and Republicans have control over only one of them.

by  Matthew  Dowd

Thursday, March 31, 2011 |  1:50 p.m.

A failure in a complex system almost always involves a combination of factors that feed on one another to cause a breakdown. As we watch Japan’s tragic nuclear-plant situation, I am reminded of the near-catastrophe at Three Mile Island in 1979 and what the postcrisis analysis showed.

Recall that the Three Mile Island nuclear plant contained sophisticated safety measures and safeguards, and engineers considered a catastrophic event highly unlikely. But a reactor meltdown nearly did happen. Why? Because of a mixture of engineering flaws, human error, and bad luck.

The same is true for much of what happens in life—whether it’s an airplane crash, a disaster in a far-off corner of the globe, a medical error, or even a personal relationship gone bad. The loss we suffer in divorce or at the end of a relationship usually doesn’t result from any one thing going wrong, but from a series of underlying issues that the couple never adequately addressed. These “hidden” issues can be inside our partner’s heart or history, or they can be in our own. Some event or series of things happens that allows us to see one another and ourselves more clearly. And a loss is the result.

This phenomenon happens in politics as well. Which brings us to the 2012 presidential contest. Contrary to what many pundits and partisans might have you believe, a Democratic president rarely loses a reelection race. Only once in the past 120 years has a president from that party who sought a second term lost. And that was Jimmy Carter in 1980. Thus, the odds heavily favor President Obama if he decides to run again—and all signs point that he will.

So what combination of factors in this complex system of politics must come together to cause a catastrophe for Obama politically that would result in his defeat?

(VIDEO: Obama Could be Hard to Beat in 2012.)

Only one Democratic president has lost a reelection bid.

I see three, and all have to be in place and reinforce each other for Obama to lose. First, the economy in 2012 has to be either stagnant or in decline in the 10 or so key electoral states (especially the ones in the Midwest) as he heads into the election. This would mean that the economy is creating very few net jobs in 2012 and that prices (including food and gas) are still rising.

Second, no new major international crisis arises that causes people to rally behind Obama because of his competent handling of it. And I emphasize the words “new,” “major,” and “competent.” Afghanistan and Iraq devolving again into a problem will not help Obama, and actually may hurt him because our country has basically moved on from the situation in both places.

Third, a Republican nominee has to emerge who is charismatic; is a very good communicator; is in touch with the country’s economic and social needs; and is a new brand of GOP leader whom many younger voters can connect with. Think of what it took in 1980 to defeat the Democratic incumbent—Ronald Reagan and crises galore.

All three factors must converge for Obama to lose, and two of them are needed to drive his job approval down to a place, as I have written before, that makes it difficult for him to win. As one can see, these three elements don’t include how much money the Democratic National Committee and Obama have at their disposal; how much cash the Republican National Committee or the Republican nominee raises; the quality of each campaign staff; the legislative machinations of Congress; or the use of modern technology in the campaigns (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc.). Those are all tactical factors that, ultimately, will have little influence on whether Obama wins or loses.

Two of these factors—the economy and an international crisis—are basically out of the GOP’s hands (in many ways, they are out of the Obama campaign’s control as well). Republicans should only be concerned with nominating the candidate who can give them a shot at winning if the two other factors are in place. And note that I didn’t add longtime political office-holding to the qualifications. Experience is nice, but it isn’t necessary in this environment.

Understanding the factors that could cost Obama the election allows us to not get distracted by the much-hashed-over details that matter little, such as money and technology. Focusing on what’s really important is a very good lesson for politics—and life.