Ib Is Islam a Peaceful and Tolerant Religion? What Does History and Current Events Tell Us?
Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the
world, the espousers of it...have been as wolves and tigers to all other
rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation,
and only their name remaining: that many countries,which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness:
and that so many once numerous and powerful Nations are vanished from the earth. Such was, and is at this day,
the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of humankind.
The founder of Methodism, John Wesley on Islam -
“I am telling you
that my religion doesn’t tolerate other religion.
It doesn’t tolerate. The only one law which needs to be spread,
it can be here or anywhere else has to be Islam.”
Cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika in an interview with ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) in November 2005
it is a symbol of Islam."
Palestinian Arab, Mahmoud Malahi (Knight Ridder story)
“We’ve come in the
name of Islam, to teach the Americans what Islam is.”
Algerian terrorist and kidnapper
Islam is Not a
Religion of Peace
It is a Political Theory of Conquest
That Seeks Domination by Any Means it Can
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Ounce of History is Worth a Pound of Logic
Oliver Wendell Holmes
Andrea Tantaros summarizes Muslim History
Muslims are not supposed to kill other Muslims, only infidels, yet they get around that by considering their opponent Muslims not true Muslims or infidels. This is what happened when the Muslims of West Pakistan wiped out 3 million of the Muslims of East Pakistan (Bangladesh) and raped hundreds of thousands of their women. The West Pakistanis considered the East Pakistani Muslims as infidels because they wanted autonomy from West Pakistan. Muhammad Bin Abdulla a Bangladeshi, observed the killing and wrote (Leaving Islam):
I saw a well equipped invading army indiscriminately killing millions of civilians and raping two hundred thousand women. Eight million uprooted people walked barefoot to take refuge in a neighboring country. The institution of Islamic leadership supported the invading army actively in capturing and killing freedom fighters and non-Muslims and raping women on a massive scale. Each of four thousand mosques became the ideological powerhouses of the mass-killers and mass-rapists. And these killers and rapists, these Islamists, were the same people of the same land as the freedom fighters and raped women. That was the civilians of Bangladesh and the killer army of Pakistan in 1971. All the Muslim countries and communities of the world either stood idle or actively sided with the killers and rapists in the name of Islam.
Abul Kasem another Bangladeshi had an opportunity to speak with West Pakistanis when he was a student at the Asian Institute of Technology about the massacre. He wrote (Leaving Islam):
Then came the topic of creation of Bangladesh. Naturally, they sided with the Pakistani army, although they expressed sorrow for the lives lost. When they heard that 3 million people were massacred and that the action of the Pakistani Islamic army could not be dismissed simply as an act of restoration of peace and order, they simply laughed. The reason was that they did not believe what had happened to our people in the occupied Bangladesh. When we asked them how many Bengalis were killed, they quoted a figure of three thousand. They also insisted that those killed were mostly Hindus, so we should not bother too much about the massacre. That was to say that the killing of Hindus was all right. We pointed out that the figure of 3 million was not invented by the government of Bangladesh but the figure was from reliable foreign sources such as the Agence France Presse, Reuters, and Time magazine. We also told them that a Pakistani journalist by the name of Anthony Mascarenhas has written a book titled the Rape of Bangladesh where he had quoted a similar figure. The Pakistanis simply dismissed those facts and said that the foreign journalists were bribed by India to write these figures…
Now the interesting point was that whenever the atrocities of the Pakistani Islamic army were mentioned to them, they were all adamant that we (the Bengalis) were to be blamed for that. Why? Simply, because we were not good Muslims. How? If we were good Muslims, we would not have voted for the Awami League (the political party wanting autonomy from West Pakistan). They told us that the right parties to vote were Islamic parties like the Pakistan Muslim League or Jamat-I-Islami. It was no secret to guess that most Pakistanis considered us (Bengalis) non-Muslims, as almost all of us voted for the Awami League. Therefore, they opined that the genocide was not really a genocide! It was getting rid of the non-Muslims. After all, the non-Muslims are not really human beings.
Jihad and Islam
Top movie shows Smyrna burning at night. Bottom movie shows people trying to escape.
Our flowers are the sword and the dagger;
Ali ibn Abi Talib, the fourth caliph wrote the verse above.
The history of Smyrna tells us a lot about Islam. The link Jihad Triumphant, The Burning of Smyrna, tells about what the final annihilation of Smyrna by the Muslims did in 1922 but that wasn't the first time they destroyed the city. Marjorie Housepian in her book, The Smyrna Affair wrote:
The Seljuk Turks destroyed the city in 1084, the Persians in 1130.
She also writes about the Muslim warrior Tamerlane as follows:
In 1402 Tamerlaine butchered the inhabitants and razed the buildings in an orgy of cruelty that would become legendary. While the inhabitants slept, his men stealthily undermined the city's wall and propped them up with timber smeared with pitch. Then he applied the torch, the walls sank into ditches prepared to receive them, and the city lay open to the invader. Smyrna's would be defenders, the Knights of Saint John, escaped to their ships by fighting their way through a mob of panic-stricken inhabitants. They escaped just in time, for Tamerlaine ordered a thousand prisoners beheaded and used their skulls to raise a monument in his honor. He did not linger over his victory - it was his custom to ravage and ride on. He rode on to Ephesus, where the city's children were sent out to greet and appease him with song. "What is this noise?" he roared, and ordered his horsemen to trample the children to death.
In Tamerlane's case it is not clear that Islam is responsible for his behavior. However, according to Vahakn Dadrian a scholar on the Armenian genocide Islam played a very big role in the murder of the Armenians. In response to an interview about this (Alyssa Lappen, Armenia's Tears, frontpagemagazine 5/2/05) he said:
First of all, Islam played a major role both in the period of the Abdul Hamit massacres [1894-1896] and the 1909 Adana massacres and the World War I genocide. During the Abdul Hamit era, Islam was the main impetus, the direct impetus of the massacres, because 90 percent of the massacres took place on Fridays, which is the religious holiday. Immediately at the end of the religious ceremonies in the mosques, the mobs, harangued by Muslim clerics, were incited and as a result the motivation was reinforced to attack and massacre the Armenian population of the respective regions. In other words, Islam as an institution, and champions of Islam, the Muslim clerics, played a major role in the organization and execution of the series of massacres. In World War I, Islam also was exploited by way of formally declaring jihad, the main target of which became the Christian Armenians. Holy War can only be proclaimed by the sultan who is also the Khalif, the supreme religious authority, and the Sheikh ul Islam, the religious head of Islam. One of the greatest incentives of jihad for motivating people to kill is the promise of celestial bliss, and other kinds of rewards in heaven. This played a major role in mobilizing the masses, the naïve masses. In Archbishop Balakian's book, the Armenian Golgotha, there are scenes in which, after every massacre, the head of the gendarmes units, spread his prayer rug and thanked god for serving him through jihad-borne massacres massacres.
Marjorie wrote about the American consul Horton's concern for his friend, the Greek Archbishop Chrysostomos:
a venerable figure beloved by his people and anathema to the Turks because of his outspoken devotion to the Greek cause. Horton had last seen the Archbishop on the eve of the Turkish occupation, when Chrysostomos called at the consulate to ask if something could be done to protect his people. The consul could not bring himself to reply; he urged instead that the Archbishop accept the French offer of a marine escort to haven on one of the battleships. Chrysostomos refused. He was dressed in black and his face was pale and infinitely sad.
The following is an excerpt from Dr. Serge Trifkovic's book The Sword of the Prophet: A Politically-Incorrect Guide to Islam which in recounting Turkish history tells the fate of the great archbishop:
The Ottomans lurched from outrage to outrage. Regular slaughters of Armenians in Bayazid (1877), Alashgurd (1879), Sassun (1894), Constantinople (1896), Adana (1909) and Armenia itself (1895-96) claimed a total of two hundred thousand lives, but they were only rehearsals for the genocide of 1915. The slaughter of Christians in Alexandria in 1881 was only a rehearsal for the artificial famine induced by the Turks in 1915-16 that killed over a hundred thousand Maronite Christians in Lebanon and Syria. So imminent and ever-present was the peril, and so fresh the memory of these events in the minds of the non-Moslems, that illiterate Christian mothers dated events as so many years before or after "such and such a massacre." Across the Middle East, the bloodshed of 1915-1922 finally destroyed ancient Christian communities and cultures that had survived since Roman times-groups like the Jacobites (Syrian Orthodox), Nestorians (Iraqi Orthodox), and Chaldaeans (Iraqi Catholic)...
burning of the Greek city of Smyrna and the massacre and scattering of its
three hundred thousand Christian inhabitants is one of the most poignant - if
not, after the vast outrages of the 20th century, the bloodiest - crimes in all
history. It marked the end of the Greek community in Asia Minor. On the eve of
its destruction, Smyrna was a bustling port and commercial center. It was a
genuinely civilized, in the old-world sense, place. An American consul-general
later remembered a busy social life that included teas, dances, musical
afternoons, games of tennis and bridge, and soirees given in the salons of the
highly cultured Armenian and Greek bourgeoisie.
Sic gloria transit: sporadic killings of Christians, mostly Armenians, started as soon as the Turks overran it on September 9, 1922. Within days, they escalated to mass slaughter. It did not "get out of hand," however, in the sense of an uncontrolled chaos perpetrated by an uncommanded military rabble. The Turkish military authorities deliberately escalated it. The Greek Orthodox Bishop Chrysostomos remained with his flock. "It is the tradition of the Greek Church and the duty of the priest to stay with his congregation," he replied to those begging him to flee. The Moslem mob fell upon him, uprooted his eyes and, as he was bleeding, dragged him by his beard through the streets of the Turkish quarter, beating and kicking him. Every now and then, when he had the strength to do so, he would raise his right hand and blessed his persecutors. A Turk got so furious at this gesture that he cut off his hand with his sword. He fell to the ground, and was hacked to pieces by the angry mob. The carnage culminated in the burning of Smyrna, which started on September 13 when the Turks put the Armenian quarter to torch and the conflagration engulfed the city. The remaining inhabitants were trapped at the seafront, from which there was no escaping the flames on one side, or Turkish bayonets on the other. This was the end of Christianity in Asia Minor, whose history goes back to events recorded in the New Testament itself.
The Turks deny that they burned Smyrna. Horton, an eyewitness presented evidence that they did. He wrote:
The main facts in regard to the Smyrna fire are:
1. The streets leading into the Armenian Quarter were guarded by Turkish soldier sentinels and no one was permitted to enter while the massacre was going on.
2. Armed Turks, including many soldiers, entered the quarter thus guarded and went through it looting, massacring and destroying. They made a systematic and horrible "clean up" after which they set fire to it in various places by carrying tins of petroleum or other combustibles into the houses or by saturating bundles of rags in petroleum and throwing these bundles in through the windows.
3. They planted small bombs under the paving stones in various places in the European part of the city to explode and act as a supplementary agent in the work of destruction caused by the burning petroleum which Turkish soldiers sprinkled about the streets. The petroleum spread the fire and led it through the European quarter and the bombs shook down the tottering walls. One such bomb was planted near the American Girls' School and another near the American Consulate.
4. They set fire to the Armenian quarter on the thirteenth of September, 1922. The last Greek soldiers had passed through Smyrna on the evening of the eighth, that is to say, the Turks had been in full, complete and undisputed possession of the city for five days before the fire broke out and for much of this time they had kept the Armenian quarter cut off by military control while conducting a systematic and thorough massacre. If any Armenians were still living int he localities at the time the fires were lighted they were hiding in cellars too terrified to move, for the whole town was overrun by Turkish soldiers, especially the places where the fires were started. In general, all the Christians of the city were keeping in their houses in a state of extreme and justifiable terror for themselves and their families, for the Turks had been in possession of the city for five days, during which time they had been looting, raping and killing. It was the burning of the houses of the Christians which drove them into the streets and caused the fearful scenes of suffering which will be described later. Of this state of affairs, I was an eye-witness.
5. The fire was lighted at the edge of the Armenian Quarter as a time when a strong wind was blowing toward the Christian section and away from the Turkish. The Turkish quarter was not in any way involved int eh catastrophe and during all the abominable scenes that followed and all the indescribable sufferings of the Christians, the Mohammedan quarter was lighted up and gay with dancing, singing and joyous celebration.
6. Turkish soldiers led the fire down into the well-built modern Greek and European section of Smyrna by soaking the narrow streets with petroleum or other highly inflammable matter. They poured petroleum in front of the American Consulate with no other possible purpose than to communicate the fire to that building at a time when C. Claflin Davis, Chairman of the Disaster Relief Committee of the Red Cross, Constantinople Chapter, and others, were standing in the door. Mr. Davis went out and put his hands in the mud thus created and it smelled like petroleum and gasoline mixed. The soldiers seen by Mr. Davis and the others had started from the quay and were proceeding toward the fire.
7. Dr. Alexander Maclachan, President of the American College, and a sergeant of American Marines were stripped, the one of his clothes and the other of a portion of his uniform, and beaten with clubs by Turkish soldiers. A squad of American Marines was fired on.
One argument the Turks make to justify the slaughter of Greeks is that while their forces were in Turkey they committed atrocities. There were times when the Greeks would burn a Turkish town. George Horton explained this as follows:
During the Greek administration, I traveled frequently over a large part of the occupied territory and visited many of the interior villages. I found perfect security everywhere, native Greeks and Turks living together on friendly terms. In general there would be in each village a small administrative office in charge of a petty officer and two or three aides. I noticed the persistent effort which these people made to fraternize with the Turks and to placate them. Very often have I taken my coffee in the public square of some small town with the Greek officials, the Turkish hodja (seconday school teacher) and various of the Mohammedan notables. I remember particularly shortly before the Greek defeat sitting thus with a venerable hodja and a Greek surgeon under a plane-tree helping to celebrate the marriage of the hodja to his fourth wife, which had taken place the day before.
The dark side of this seemingly idyllic picture is that quite frequently the two or three Greek officials would be found some morning with their throats cut, whereupon an order would be sent to the village that the names of the assassins must be revealed or the town would be burned. This, if I remember correctly, was modeled upon our so-called "punitive expeditions" in the Philippines, which the Greek authorities often cited to me in speaking of the matter. In no case did the Turks reveal the names of the offenders and at least twice my office has been invaded by the notables of some town who complained that their village had been burned. On each occasion, I asked: "Were the Greek officials in your town murdered last night?" And the answer on both these occasions was, "Yes, but we could not tell the names of the offenders because we did not know who they were."
Mr. Horton wrote that when the Greeks retreated from the Turks the did burn and lay waste the land. He wrote that the Greeks:
were fleeing from an implacable enemy from whom they could expect no mercy, if captured. They covered, such of them as got away, the distance from the front to the coast in record time. The entire Moslem population through which they passed was hostile and well-armed...
That they did burn and lay waste the land may be taken for granted. The Greeks have claimed military necessity for this, and it would appear that they could plead such necessity if ever it can be pleaded. They certainly had more reason for laying bare the country between themselves and the advancing Khemalists than had our own Sherman on his "March to the Sea".
Another argument made by the Turks is that the killing was 50-50 between the Christians and the Muslims. George Horton in his book, The Blight of Asia wrote:
In the first place, the Christians in the power of the Turk have never had much opportunity to massacre, even had they been so disposed... In all the former Ottoman provinces that have succeeded in casting off the Turkish blight - Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Greece - there is very little, if any, record of Turks massacred by Christians.
The conduct of the Greeks toward the thousands of Turks residing in Greece, while the ferocious massacres were going on, and while Smyrna was being burned and refugees, wounded, outraged and ruined, were pouring into every port of Hellas, was one of the most inspiring and beautiful chapters in all that country's history. There were no reprisals. The Turks living in Greece were in no wise molested, nor did any storm of hatred or evenge burst upon their heads...
In fact, the whole conduct of Greece, during and after the persecution of the Christians in Turkey, has been most admirable, as witness also its treatment of the Turkish prisoners of war, and its efforts for the thousands of refugees that have been thrown upon its soil. I know of what I am speaking, for I was in Greece and saw with my own eyes...
Had the Greeks, after the massacres in the Pontus and at Smyrna, massacred all the Turks in Greece, the record would have been 50-50 almost.
During the Hellenic administration of Smyrna between 1919 and 1922 Horton writes that:
Despite many difficulties, the Greek civil authorities, as far as their influence extended, succeeded in giving Smyrna and a large portion of the occupied territory, the most orderly, civilized and progressive administration that it has had in historic times. Mr. Sterghiades, who continued to the last his policy of punishing severely all offenders of Greek origin against the public order, lost, for that reason, popularity in Asia Minor..
The Hellenic Administration supported and aided in every way possible educational institutions. Its support and encouragement of American educational and philanthropic institutions will be taken up later. It is chiefly to be praised, however, for the measures which it took, paid for out of the Greek Treasury, for the maintenance and improvement of Turkish schools...
The Greek administration made a serious and intelligent effort to organize a sanitary service for the compiling of statistics, the betterment of sanitary conditions and the suppression of epidemics and contagious diseases, such as malaria, syphilis, etc...
A Pasteur institute was opened at Smyrna by the Greeks on the eighteenth of August, 1919, under the direction of a specialist working in conjunction with a staff of experts. Out of over one thousand five hundred patients treated during the first two months of its existence who had been bitten by dogs, jackals or wolves, only four died. Treatment was free in this institute..
Financial aid on a large scale was furnished as was the distribution of flour, clothing etc. to refugees caused by the Khemalist raids in the interior and the destruction in 1919 of the cities of Aidin and Nazli. Among those so succored were thousands of Turks.
George Horton wrote regarding the slaughter of the Christians in Smyrna:
At first, civilian Turks, natives of the town, were the chief offenders. I myself saw such civilians armed with shotguns watching the windows of Christian houses ready to shoot at any head that might appear. These had the air of hunters crouching and stalking their prey. But the thing that made an unforgettable impression was the expression on their faces. It was that of an ecstasy of hate and savagery. There was in it, too, a religious exaltation, but it was not beautiful, it was the religion of the Powers of Darkness. One saw, too, all the futility of missionary work and efforts of conversion. Here was complete conviction, the absolute triumph of error and the doctrine of murder and pitilessness. There was something infinitely sad in those pale writhing faces on which seemed to shine the wan light of hell.
The Turks killed Americans as well as Armenians and Greeks. Horton in his book, The Blight of Asia wrote:
I was talking recently to a prominent clergyman, friend of the one-time president of one of the greatest missionary colleges in Turkey, who made the following statement:
"Some time ago, I was talking with the President of one of the American Colleges in Turkey who told me of the frightful treatment of the people in the town where he was located. He told me the college was closed and the professors, their wives and families driven out and some sixty or seventy of them were put to death. The tears streamed down his cheeks as he said: 'I can see those dear, good people at this moment, as they were marched away by the heartless Turk.'"
Andrew Bostom in his article A Wahabism Problem (National Review Online Dec 6, 02) explained that one reason for these massacres were attempts by the Christians to throw off the yoke of Dhimmitude. He wrote:
Contemporary accounts from European diplomats confirm that these brutal massacres were perpetrated in the context of a formal Jihad against the Armenians who had attempted to throw off the yoke of dhimmitude by seeking equal rights and autonomy. For example, the Chief Dragoman (Turkish-speaking interpreter) of the British embassy reported regarding the 1894-96 massacres:
…[The perpetrators] are guided in their general action by the prescriptions of the Sheri [Sharia] Law. That law prescribes that if the "rayah" [dhimmi] Christian attempts, by having recourse to foreign powers, to overstep the limits of privileges allowed them by their Mussulman [Muslim] masters, and free themselves from their bondage, their lives and property are to be forfeited, and are at the mercy of the Mussulmans. To the Turkish mind the Armenians had tried to overstep those limits by appealing to foreign powers, especially England. They therefore considered it their religious duty and a righteous thing to destroy and seize the lives and properties of the Armenians…"
The scholar Bat Yeor confirms this reasoning, noting that the Armenian quest for reforms invalidated their "legal status," which involved a "contract" (i.e., with their Muslim Turkish rulers). This
…breach…restored to the umma [the Muslim community] its initial right to kill the subjugated minority [the dhimmis], [and] seize their property…
The Muslims believed they were carrying out Allah's will when they engaged in massacres. Marjorie Houspian, in her book, The Smyrna Affair quoted a missionary eye witness of a Turkish massacre of the Armenians who said:
"The slaughter of the Armenians was a joy to the Turks, a massacre was heralded by the blowing of trumpets and concluded by a procession. Accompanied by the prayers of the mullahs and muezzins, who from the minarets implored the blessings of Allah, the slaughter was accomplished in admirable order according to a well arranged plan. The crowd, supplied with arms by the authorities, joined most amicably with the soldiers and the Kurdish Hamidieh on these festive occasions. The Turkish women stimulated their heroes by raising a gutteral shriek of their war cry, the Zilghit, and deafening the hopeless despair of their victims by singing their nuptial songs. A kind of wild cannibal humour seized the crowd...the savage crew did not even spare the children."
One horrible way the Turks murdered their infidel countrymen was to march them to their deaths. A picture of such a death march is shown below.
"The long line that lead to death. Deportation of Christians from their houses to the arid wastes to die" 1926. Kerckhoff Art Gallery 4/11/97
Alyssa Lappen in an article titled Turkey's Forgotten Islamist Progrom (frontpagemag 5/24/05) wrote:
According to Speros Vryonis Jr.'s landmark new study, The Mechanism of Catastrophe, the September 1955 government-orchestrated pogrom against the Greek Orthodox community “included the systematic destruction of the majority of its churches,” monasteries and cemeteries. Published this month by Greekworks.com, the work subtitled The Turkish Pogrom of September 6-7, 1955, and the Destruction of the Greek Community of Istanbul shows that riots which destroyed 4,500 Greek homes, 3,500 businesses, 90 religious institutions and 36 schools in 45 distinct communities, resulted not only from “fervid chauvinism, or even [from] the economic resentment of many impoverished rioters, but [from] the profound religious fanaticism in many segments of Turkish society.”
That religion played a role can be seen by
the cries of the organizers of the rioters who shouted
“Cleanse the fatherland of the infidel!”
“We do not want infidels' merchandise in our country.”
Alyysa Lappen writes:
lesson to be taken from the 1955 pogrom is that little, if anything, has
actually changed in
That is frightening when one
considers to what degree the United States has armed the Turks.
In 1941 and under Turkish Prime Minister Sukriu Saracoglu in 1942, the Turkish government and minister of foreign affairs, figuring that the Germans would emerge victorious from World War II, began the mass deportation of minority men aged 18 to 38. The forced labor battalions of the so-called 20 generations of Jews, Greeks and Armenians were meant never again to see the light of day.
Turkey's atrocities toward Christians began long before Smyrna. An eyewitness to the to the 1453 Turkish conquest of Constantinople wrote:
The enraged Turkish soldiers . . . gave no quarter. When they had massacred and there was no longer any resistance, they were intent on pillage and roamed through the town stealing, disrobing, pillaging, killing, raping, taking captive men, women, children, old men, young men, monks, priests, people of all sorts and conditions… There were virgins who awoke from troubled sleep to find those brigands standing over them with bloody hands and faces full of abject fury… [The Turkish jihadis] dragged them, tore them, forced them, dishonored them, raped them at the cross-roads and made them submit to the most terrible outrages…
Tender children were brutally snatched from their mothers’ breasts and girls were pitilessly given up to strange and horrible unions, and a thousand other terrible things happened. . .
Temples [including Hagia Sophia] were desecrated, ransacked and pillaged . . . sacred objects were scornfully flung aside, the holy icons and the holy vessels were desecrated…. Immense numbers of sacred and profane books were flung on the fire or torn up and trampled under foot.
Frank Gaffney wrote an article titled No to Islamist Turkey (Washington Times, 9/28/05) in which he demonstrates how the Islamic government of Prime Minister Erdogan is turning Turkey from a secular into a religious Islamofacist state. Apologists for Islam often cite Turkey as an example of how democracy and Islam can go together but democracy is what let people like Erdogan come to power. In the past when his equivalents came to power the army deposed them but now it looks like Islam will succeed brainwashing Turkey into anti-American monsters. Frank Gaffney wrote:
Turkey's traditionally secular educational system is being steadily supplanted by madrassa-style "imam hatip" schools and other institutions where students are taught only the Koran and its interpretation according to the Islamofascists...
Among the consequences of Mr. Erdogan's domination of the press has been an inflaming of Turkish public opinion against President Bush in particular and the United States more generally. Today, a novel describing a war between America and Turkey leading to the nuclear destruction of Washington is a runaway best-seller, even in the Turkish military.
Islam has shown its brutal face in Iraq in the killings of Shiites by Sunnis and vice versa but even more in the killing of Christians by Muslims. According to Ed West Iraq’s Assyrian Christians face extinction four years after the toppling of Saddam. The following is text from Ed West’s article We Must Not Let This Ancient Church Slide Into Oblivion, 4/1/07:
When they cook a dish in the Middle
East, it is traditional to put the meat on top of the rice when they serve it.
They kidnapped a woman’s baby in Baghdad, a toddler, and because the mother was
unable to pay the ransom, they returned her child – beheaded, roasted and
served on a mound of rice.” The infant’s crime was to be an Assyrian, but this
story, reported by the Barnabus Fund, went unnoticed in the West, like so many
other horrific accounts of Christian persecution in Iraq.
Since the invasion of Iraq, Muslim militants have bombed 28 churches and murdered hundreds of Christians. Last October, Islamists beheaded a priest in Mosul in revenge for the Pope’s remarks about Islam at Regensburg. But never let it be said that jihadis do not have a sense of ironic humour: that same month they crucified a 14-year-old Christian boy in Basra.
The latest report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that two million Iraqis have fled since the invasion, and almost a third of these are Assyrian – who are down from 1.4 million in Saddam’s Iraq to fewer than 500,000 today.
The Assyrians are one of the world’s oldest civilisations. Their empire collapsed in 612 BC after four and a half millennia of civilisation; Rome was still a village and the Angles and Saxons were a thousand years away from forming a partnership. Now, while one of the world’s oldest Christian nations faces extinction at the hands of Islamic extremists, the West does nothing.
Several Iraqi Christians "are nailed to a cross and their arms are tied up with ropes. The ropes are put on fire. According to the site, Voordewind described how a person, who "survived" a crucifixion, "even showed holes in his hands," apparently from nails.
Voordewind said victims of the crucifixions are "in most cases Christian converts who abandoned Islam or people who, religiously speaking, are involved in mixed marriages."
Christians Under Attack is a web site that keeps track of Islamic atrocities against Christians.
Victor A. Gunasekara in his web page Slavery and the Infidel in Islam writes:
it is in the Eastward expansion of Islam that the principles of Jihad were put into full operation. Here there were no "people of the Book" for whom some dispensation had been given in the Koran. The key link here was the conquest of Iran in 643, a non-Arabic people. The last Persian emperor was killed in 651, but the conversion of Iran was to have grave consequences for Islam later on as it produced the first schism in Islam.
But the expansion East of Iran through Afghanistan, Kabul falling in 664, south-east into India and north-east into Central Asia and China was clearly into Kaffir territory. If some restraint was shown in the Westward expansion into Christian territory now the gloves were well and truly off. The full rigour of what the Koran has to say on Jihad and the Infidel was about to unroll in history.
The infidels in the new territories were mainly Buddhists and Hindus. The Buddhists with their pacifist philosophy offered no resistance and were the first to go. The destruction of the monasteries, the killing of the monks and the rape of nuns is well-known even though there is still no book documenting this episode in all its horror. In particular the destruction of the Buddhist universities of Taxila and Nalanda are particularly heinous crimes. The burning of the Library of Nalanda ranks with the destruction of the Library of Alexandria as the two most notorious acts of vandalism in the course of Islamic expansion.
Ghosh's book gives many examples how these Islamic principles were carried out in succeeding centuries in India against the Hindus. Hinduism had a military tradition, cf. Khrishna's exhortation to Arjuna to fight given in the Bhagavat Gita. But Hindu warfare lacked the fanaticism of the Muslim and theirs was not to convert subject populations. Indeed Hinduism as an ethnic religion meant that people could not come within its confines except by birth. The Hindus were able to offer some resistance but not to the extent of preventing the establishment of Muslim rule over large parts of India.
The fate of Rajasthan was typical. Ghosh writes: "The Rajputs houses of worship were destroyed, their women raped and carried away, their children taken away as bonded labour, and all non-combatants murdered. The Rajputs soon came to know the ways of the Moslems. If it appeared that the battle could not be won, then they themselves killed their women and children, Masada style, and then went to fight the Moslems until death. In many cases the Rajput women took their own lives by taking poison and then jumping into a deep fiery pit (so that their bodies could not be desecrated)".
As with other areas under Islamic conquest sex was used not only to satisfy the carnal appetites of the conquerors but also as some sort of population policy. Ghosh writes: "The Arabs not only imposed their ruthless rule and totalitarian creed on the countries they conquered; they also populated these countries with a prolific progeny which they procreated on native women. Every Arab worth his race 'married' scores, sometimes hundreds of these helpless women after their menfolk had all been killed. Divorce of a wedded wife had been made very easy by the 'law' of Islam. A man could go on marrying and divorcing at the rate of several women during the span of a single day and night. What was more convenient, there was no restriction on the number of concubines a man could keep. The Arab conquerors used these male privileges in full measure." Ghosh sees this as the main cause why the population of territories conquered rapidly became within decades Moslem.
The most cruel treatment was reserved to the religious leaders of the Hindus who refused to convert. In 1645 the Sikh guru Tegh Bahadur was tortured for his resistance to the forcible conversion of the Hindus in Kashmir. His followers were killed before him and when this did not make him yield he was finally beheaded..
Serge Trifkovic wrote that the:
massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history, bigger in sheer numbers than the Holocaust, or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks, more extensive even than the slaughter of the North American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese.
An enthusiastic description of an attack on an Indian town noted: (Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims, Prometheus Books)
"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously that the stream was discoloured and people were unable to drink it... Praise be to Allah."
India still suffers from Islamic terrorist attacks a recent one being the attack on Mumbai in which some of the victims were tortured. Muslims also attack infidels who commit crimes such as marrying a Muslim woman.
Ibn Warraq, author of Why I am not a Muslim wrote an article titled, Islam, A Totalitarian Ideology (frontpagemag.com 10/18/04) in which he asked:
But what of putative Islamic tolerance? Those apologists who continue to perpetuate the myth of Islamic tolerance should contemplate the following cursory tabulation of jihad depredations: the massacre and extermination (totalling tens of millions, combined) of the Zoroastrians in Iran, and the Buddhists and Hindus in India; of the more than 6000 Jews in Fez, Morocco in 1033, the entire Jewish community of 4000 in Granada in 1066, of the Jews in Marrakesh in 1232, of the Jews of Tetuan, Morocco in 1790, and of the Jews of Baghdad in 1828; the jihad genocide of 1.5 million Armenians in Turkey at the beginning of the 20th Century, and the jihad genocide of 2 million South Sudanese Christians and Animists at close of the 20th Century, and so on, ad nauseam.
Thomas Haidon, a Muslim responded to Ibn Warraq and wrote:
Ibn Waraq seems to have a short memory of several periods of Muslim history where liberalism and humanism flourished...
There is a growing movement of Muslims (albeit still a significant minority) who genuinely wish to radically reform Muslim thinking, to make it consistent with peace and modernity. The Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism, and the Centre for Islamic Pluralism are two such organizations leading this movement, and are taking steps toward defining the scope and establishing the framework for comprehensive reform..
Although it is true that there have been times that the Christian world has been more intolerant than the Muslim world, it is an exaggeration to say that during these periods liberalism and humanism flourished.
David Meir-Levi wrote an article titled: Terrorism: The Root Causes (frontpagemag.com 11/9/05)
his ground-breaking book The Clash of Civilizations, Samuel Huntington lists
scores of conflicts caused by Moslems: Bosnia, Kosovo, Turks vs. Greeks, Turks
vs. Armenians, Chechens vs. Russia, Ingush vs. Ossetians, Bangladeshi Moslems
vs. Buddhists, Myanmar Moslems vs. Buddhists, Indonesian and Malaysian Moslems
vs. ethnic Chinese, Thai Moslems vs. their Buddhist government, Moslem East
Timor government represses Catholic Indonesians, Chad and Kenya, and Tanzanian
Moslems attack Christian groups in Nigeria.
In addition, many current conflicts have been initiated and maintained by Moslem forces: Afghanistani Taliban and al-Qaeda, Mauritanian slavery, Sudanese slavery, Sudan's 19-year civil war, Ivory Coast's recent revolt, Nigeria's 10-year war, Algeria's 10-year war, Ethiopia vs. Eritrea, Iraqis vs. Kurds, 8 years of the Iran-Iraq War, then Kuwait, Lebanon’s 27-year occupation by Syria, Lebanon’s 12-year occupation by the PLO, The PLO's war against Jordan (1967-70), Pakistan vs. India in Kashmir, Indonesia (with Bali the latest manifestation), Arabs vs. Jews in Israel, jihad in Philippines, Islamists in Daghestan, Uighur in China, Islamic extremists in Uzbekistan, Ditto in Pakistan, Thailand's Moslem insurrection, Chechnya and Arab/Moslem involvement in Beslan, Syrian training grounds for terrorists of all creeds, colors, Iraq "insurgency" (Syrian, Iranian and Saudi terrorists), and al-Qaeda in Somalia.
According to Huntington, Moslems participated in 26 of 50 ethno-political conflicts in 1993 alone. In that year, the New York Times identified 48 locations in which a total of 59 ethnic conflicts occurred. Half of these were Moslems fighting Moslems, and most of the rest were Moslems fighting non-Moslems (NY Times, 2/7/93, pp. 1 & 14, per Huntington). Similar independent analysis quoted by Huntington for that same year shows that between two-thirds and three-quarters of all the conflicts in the world were Moslems against Moslems, or Moslems against non-Moslems.
Compilations of data for ensuing years also revealed that during the early 1990s, Moslems were engaged in more inter-group violence than any other group.
The Reverend Jerry Falwell said on Sixty Minutes on 10/6/02 that:
I think Mohammed was a terrorist,
and that Muhammad
was a - a violent man, a man of war. Jesus set the example for love, as did Moses, I think Mohammed set an opposite example.
The death of that man (Falwell) is a religious duty, said Mohsen Shabestari, a representative of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In addition Moslems rioted in India. These Islamic reactions just prove Falwell's point.
Wafa Sultan, during a debate on Al Jazeera on March 4, 2008 said:
Winston Churchill said regarding Islam that (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London:Longmans, Green & Co., 1899)):
No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step;
During World War II the Muslims sided against Churchill and England and with the Nazis. Grand Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini issued a fatwa- "summons to a holy war against Britain" in May 1941. The Mufti's widely heralded proclamation against Britain was declared in Iraq, where he was instrumental in "the pro-Nazi" Iraqi revolt of 1941. During the Second World War in Yugoslavia, many Muslim clerics in Bosnia and Kosovo were willing accomplices in the genocide of the nation's Serbian, Jewish and Roma population. From 1941 until 1945, the Nazi-installed regime of Ante Pavelic in Croatia carried out some of the most horrific crimes of the Holocaust, killing over 800,000 Yugoslav citizens - 750,000 Serbs, 60,000 Jews and 26,000 Roma. In these crimes, they were helped by Muslim fundamentalists in Bosnia and Kosovo who were openly supported by the Palestinian Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini. Husseini openly encouraged Muslims to join Nazi units that would be later implicated in genocide and crimes against humanity - the infamous Hanjar (or Handschar) 13th Waffen SS division. Muslim behavior suggests that Churchill's statements regarding Islam were on the mark.
The snipers who killed one American a day in October 2002 were Moslems. There was another sniper before them who shot people in the U.S. who is known to have been one by the name of Mir Aimal Kasi. Michelle Malkin wrote about him in her column The Other Beltway Bomber (Oct 16, 02).
On Jan. 25, 1993, the Pakistan-born Kasi opened fire on commuters as they sat in their cars waiting at a stoplight outside the CIA complex. He gunned down Frank A. Darling, 28, an officer in covert operations, and Lansing H. Bennett, 66, an intelligence analyst. Darling's wife, a CIA logistics officer who was in the car with her husband during the monstrous rampage, described diving to the floorboard when the shooting began. Judith Darling looked up to see her husband shot in the head, with "skin hanging everywhere."
Kasi (who also went by the surname "Kansi") later said he committed the capital murders in response to America's "wrong policy" toward Muslim countries. He said he didn't know his victims. And he wasn't interested in claiming credit or glory. He said he simply wanted to punish the United States for its role in bombing Iraq, its involvement in the killing of Palestinians, and the meddling of the CIA in the internal affairs of Muslim nations.
Jonathan Mark (The Jewish Week 12/27/02) wrote that:
Yes we know "Islam is a religion of peace," but according to the American Correctional Associaton, the number of Muslims in the federal prison system has tripled in the last decade, and Muslims now comprise some 20% of all New York prisoners.
After Moslem terrorists attempted to bring down an Israeli plane in Kenya with two Strela missiles and after they bombed an Israeli hotel in Mombassa, Kenya Rosie Dimanno in an article for the Toronto Star 12/2/02 called "Latest Attack on Jews Brings a Deafening Silence" wrote:
that great religion of peace, has had nothing to say of more murdered
Jews. That silent majority that disapproves of extremism, that argues the
Muslim faith has been ill-served by militants who've twisted every article
of the Islamic faith ‹ not a murmur of renunciation of those who commit such
travesties in their name. Where is the rage?
If little in the way of revulsion might have been expected from the hostile
nations that surround Israel, then surely a word of consolation from
moderate Muslims in the West might have been forthcoming. Yet I've heard
nary an utterance from the very same agencies and organizations, purportedly
representing Muslims and Arabs, that are so vigilant about pouncing on any
perceived racism or intolerance against their people, even in this country.
Since then there have been several blocked attempts to fire missiles at airliners landing in Israel.
After a suicide bombing and murderous riots in Nigeria sparked by a newspaper editorial about the Miss World pageant that was going to take place there an editorial appeared in the New York Post which said: (11/24/02)
Islam may be a religion of peace.
But that is surely no more comfort to the Christians being cut down in Nigeria than it was to the Christians killed in Pakistan in August. Or the Hindu pilgrims murdered in Kashmir last October. Or the Jewish children blown up on their way to school in Israel this Wednesday.
Antonio Socci, in his book, "The New Persecuted: Inquiries into Anti-Christian Intolerance in the New Century of Martyrs" provides evidence that in the past century some 50 million Christians have been killed primarily or exclusively for the reason of their faith; an average of 160,000 Christians have been killed every year since 1990, the vast majority by Muslims in the Third World: East Timor, Sudan, Mauritania, Nigeria.. Socci laments the fact that "this global persecution of Christianity is still in progress but in most cases is ignored by the mass media and Christians in the West." (Defeating Jihad 3/21/2006)
When I, the author of this web site, was a little boy, I went around to different families with a charity box collecting money for the starving people of Biafra. As an adult I learned why they were starving when I read an article by Alyssa Lappen, (FrontPageMagazine.com 9/3/03). She wrote:
Nigerias so-called civil war actually constituted a Muslim Jihad genocide that felled one million victims. Biafran Col. Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu explained in his June 1969 Ahiara Declaration, the Ibo were threatened with total destruction, and their secession resisted the Arab-Muslim expansionism which has menaced and ravaged the African continent for twelve centuries. Nigerian troops in 1966 slaughtered 50,000 like cattle. In one village, in 1968 they murdered the entire adult male population. Nigerian Lieut. Col. Murtala Mohammed declared in September 1967, My destination is Onitsha, brothers and sisters. Let nobody stand on my way, for anything that stands on my way would be crushed. Indeed, the Ibo people were crushed. As Karl Maier expertly describes in This House Has Fallen (2000), Nigerias Islamization continues today and the Ibos have become its second class citizens.
On May 11, 2004, angry young Nigerian Muslim men attacked "nonbelievers" while others burned cars, stores and apartments. An Associated Press reporter saw youths at a makeshift checkpoint of burning tires strike three young women with machetes after accusing them of being "nonbelievers" for wearing Western-style skirts and blouses. (Muslims Hack Christians To Death in Nigeria, frontpagemag.com 5/13/04)
Thailand is suffering from Islamic violence. In May 2004, Sieng Patkaoe, a 60-year-old rubber tapper was found decapitated with a note threatening more killings of innocent Buddhists if more innocent Muslims were arrested. The killing of farmers is a new tactic, until his beheading they killed mostly police, army officers and civil servants (BBC News 5/31/04). MyWay reported that: ( Suspected Insurgents Kill 11 in Thailand, October 16, 2005)
20 suspected Muslim separatists stormed a monastery, hacked an elderly Buddhist
monk to death and fatally shot two temple boys Sunday in southern Thailand,
Two policemen and six other people were killed in separate incidents across Thailand's three southernmost provinces, where more than 1,000 people have been killed since a centurylong struggle for an independent state reignited in 2004.
Buddhist temples in the region are typically well-guarded by soldiers and local volunteers, but eight guards left the temple in Pattani province two weeks ago because of a funding shortage, police Maj. Narucha Suwallapa said.
"The insurgents are very cruel. They killed the monk, the temple boys, and set fire to the monks' living quarters," Narucha said.
Reuters reported in an article titled Ice cream vendor beheaded in Thai Muslim south (2/1/2007)
BANGKOK, Feb 1 (Reuters) - An ice cream vendor was killed and his headless body left sitting on the bicycle seat of his cart in Thailand’s rebellious Muslim south on Thursday, police said. The vendor, a 45-year-old Buddhist originally from the country’s north east, was shot three times in the back of his head while riding his cart into a Muslim village in Pattani, one of the three provinces hit by the violence, police said. “They chopped his head off and walked away with it, leaving his body sitting on the ice cream bike’s seat,” a Pattani policeman told Reuters by telephone. “Under current circumstances, he shouldn’t have ventured into such a village,” the policeman said.
In the 3 years preceding this beheading, 2000 people have been killed in the Islamic Jihad in Thailand.
The torture of Iraqis did not stop with the fall of Saddam Hussein. Followers of radical Shi'ite cleric Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr imprisoned, killed and mutilated Iraqis who opposed his insurrection. A U.S. military intelligence report said that after a truce with Sadr in August of 2004, Iraqi forces moved into buildings including a court building held by the radical cleric's Mahdi's Army militia and found mutilated bodies. According to the report (frontpagemag.com 9/1/04):
the court building, Iraqi police found approximately 200 mutilated bodies taken
by the Moqtada militia for speaking out against Moqtada al Sadr.
Some of the prisoners had eyes and ears drilled out and others had their limbs and heads cut off. Some males had genitals cut off and shoved in their mouths. There was evidence of rape to men, women and children."
A presentation summarizing recent terrorist attacks throughout the world can be viewed by clicking here. There are many more examples of recent Islamic atrocities given in these jihad webpages. Inspired by the on-going rate of violence in the Islamic world and the unwillingness of Muslims to acknowledge it, Glen Reinsford began documenting acts of Islamic terrorism since 9/11. To date (7/28/05), his site http://thereligionofpeace.com records over 2,647 individuals acts of death and destruction of children, woman, and men throughout the world.
Muslims in Europe have formed separate enclaves where non-Mulims are afraid to go. They also try and impose their religion on other people, in one case a non-muslim restaurant owner was attacked in Marseille for not closing for Ramadan.
Rachel Ehrenfeld wrote an excellent article about Islam's Religious Intolerance in Frontpage Magazine on December 12, 2005.
Paul Watson made a good video addressing the question of whether Islam is a peaceful religion which I've embedded below.
Table of Contents