Exposing the role that Islamic jihad theology and ideology play in the modern global conflicts

Islam IS a Religion

By

This is something I wrote awhile back, and which I published in my second volume of my Mohammad cartoons, and it’s an issue that is very important to address and to correct, if we’re ever going to begin to fight this war honestly. 

9/11: Act of Faith/ Act of War

I can’t say how many times I’ve heard the words “Islam is NOT a religion!” from hysterical religionists who are more concerned with defending religion than they are of defending the West against a religion. Islam is a religion, and it’s evil, and that’s not a contradiction. There is religion and there is morality, and the two are not the same, even though many conflate the two, particularly those who believe that religion is inherently good, which we all know isn’t true, particularly the religious. 

If your main concern is protecting religion from being associated with something as evil as Islam, then you’re in the way of victory. We’re going to have to deal with the problem of how religion, any religion, gets instant respect by virtue of the fact that it’s a religion. And the way to deal with that is not to pretend that Islam isn’t a religion, but to accept that religion can be evil.

I read a book years ago entitled Lone Survivor, by a former Navy SEAL named Marcus Luttrell. He was the lone survivor in the title, after he and his four man Navy SEAL team allowed a few Muslim goat herders to go along their way after they were discovered in the woods of Afghanistan, on a mission to kill a jihadist leader. And the decision to let them go was the last decision that three of the Navy SEALs would ever make. And part of what sealed their fate was that Luttrell, in making his decision to allow the Muslims to go their way, invoked his “Christian Soul” in doing so, as opposed to his “Warrior Soul.” 

Luttrell also argued with his unit that if they were to kill the goat herders, that it would be all over CNN. Their lives were in the balance, and he was concerned about what a corrupt, anti-American propaganda “news” channel would report about them. And those Muslim goat-herders ratted out the Navy Seals as soon as they could, leading to a battle to the death that enraged me for days, and still does whenever I think of it. 

It’s religion that fuels the Islamic enemy, and it’s religious altruism and secular altruism, which has allowed this enemy to remain unexamined, and therefore undefeated. Religion is why we’re losing against a very defeatable enemy, from the enemy’s religion, to the West’s inability to take on a religion. 

Some people have told me that Islam is not a religion because it does not contain Christianity’s tenets of “Love your enemy” and “Turn the other cheek,” but instead says “Kill the infidels wherever you find them.” Yet some Christians today understand these precepts in a way that calls for pacifism and surrender, and amounts to suicide, especially in wartime in a nuclear age. This attitude is no more moral than “kill them wherever you find them”; while jihadis follow a homicidal ethic, many in the West follow a suicidal one. And the jihadis love, to the death, that we are such suckers. 

Religion can inspire moral behavior and it can inspire for evil behavior, but the problem is that because Christianity is the dominant religious tradition in the West, most of us believe that religion cannot advocate for anything other then moral behavior, no matter what we all see to be true, that religion can lead some to commit the most obscenely unspeakable acts of evil imaginable, but done in the name of “good.” Christian altruism not only teaches Christians to sacrifice for others and to live for others, but leads to the ultimate form of altruism, which is to die for others. For some Leftist Christians, this means surrender of Europe and North America to Islam. If you think that’s extreme, consider how most of us in the West can live with the deaths of our fellow Westerners, as no matter how many are murdered by jihadists; jihad goes on unabated, with no rallies demanding our leaders to end it once and for all. 

That religious altruism, coupled with the secular altruism of the left, where all others are viewed as better and more important than us, has led to our submission to this enemy, and will ultimately lead to our self-destruction, if it’s not pushed back on in a serious way.   

In different ways on both sides, religion that’s motivating a war against civilization, and it’s respect for religion that has allowed the religious enemy to get away with mass murder. 

When George Bush lied to himself and the world after 9/11 (he knew that he didn’t know anything about Islam, but he flapped his gums anyway) that “Islam is peace,” what this born-again Christian was really saying was that “religion is peace.” He was unfit to lead us after 9/11, and we’re still paying for his refusal to see reality for what it is. And still there are prominent and influential individuals who bite their tongue about Islam, lest they suffer scrutiny for their own religion. And then there are secular people who condemn Bush, but who believe the same crap, that Islam is not the Islamic enemy’s ideology, and that the problem is a so-called political form of Islam. It’s not politics that leads individuals who kill themselves in order to murder others. Only religion can lead people to do that, and to believe that there’s some heavenly reward for their act of evil. 

After particularly horrific jihadist attacks, as the victims are still dying, callous Muslims run to the rescue of Islam to pretend that Islam has nothing to do with the attacks, and callous religionists run to the rescue of religion, pretending Islam is not a religion.

Islam is religion, it is politics, and it is a fusion of the two. There is no separation of mosque and state in any Islamic country. Islam uses its religious identity as both a shield and sword. The West’s religious need to protect the very idea of religion has hurt our need to protect ourselves from an enemy who’s motivated by religion. Talk about skewed priorities, but it just goes to show how religion trumps reality and what needs to be done in our defense. 

Someone once argued with me, “When we fight Islam as ideology, we have the chance to win; no one can win with ‘religion.'” (Nigel Farage, whom I call Nigel Mirage because of his refusal to face reality, has peddled the same BS). We’re going to have to win with religion, especially this religion, because it’s the worst and most dangerous of them all, and it motivates a global war against civilization. Denying that fact, for religious reasons, is self-defeating, and is one of the reasons why this enemy remains undefeated so long after 9/11. The only way we’re going to win, in the end, is by recognizing the truth, telling the truth and ultimately acting on the truth. Islam’s religious nature makes it get away with more than any evil secular ideology could, and that fact should make even religionists admit the danger of religion, the danger of placing faith above reason. 

This defense of religion, as if it’s the end all be all, which leads some to deny the reality that Islam is a religion, brings to the forefront the problem with Western civilization’s attitude about religion. It’s our unwillingness to criticize religion or to condemn it (though there are those who condemn “all religions,” while never condemning Islam in particular), or even acknowledge that religion can be evil, and we all know religion can be evil, even the most blinkered religionists, which has made people either praise Islam — because it’s a religion — or condemn it, but only as a non-religion. However much religionists want to deny Islam is a religion, Islam has a prophet, it has a holy book and a God. All Muslims and the vast majority of non-Muslims accept it as a religion. Pretending Islam is not a religion now — in the middle of its religious war against us — does nothing for our efforts in defending ourselves against it, and allows it to get away with even more murder than it has. As I’ve often said: No one would fly planes into buildings if they didn’t believe — religiously — that they were committing a righteous act that would send them to heaven. In the end, when we finally end the Islamic threat, we will be more honest about what role religion played in Islam’s ability to get away with the evil it’s gotten away with for over a thousand years, and of our unwillingness and inability to deal with it when it came for us. If Islam weren’t a religion, then it would not have lasted as long as it has, and it wouldn’t be defended as it is by its would-be victims. And that’s a fact that we need to observe and think about, very seriously, instead of dismissing it as somehow irrelevant. 

As I wrote in my article, My Name is Bosch and I’m a Recovered Muslim:

Our altruistic concern for the future and well being of “the Muslim world” (as if it’s a different planet) has come at the expense of American lives and treasure. We’ve placed the well being of “the Muslim world” above our own self-defense. We’ve placed today’s big lie, “Islam means peace”, above the truth we need to act on. We’ve placed the lives of Muslim civilians above the lives of our soldiers, placing them in absolutely unnecessary danger in order to protect innocent (or guilty) civilians. Our Rules of Engagement might as well be renamed the Golden Rules of Engagement, as our soldiers have been forced to treat the Islamic enemy the way we’d like to be treated. And the enemy takes full advantage of the altruistic, and self-defeating, policies that our morally corrupt politicians have concocted. We need to shift the focus onto our own well being at the enemy’s expense for a change. 

Here’s an exchange I just had in the middle of putting together this piece, of someone replying to my article, Muslim Roulette, along with my reply:

“The author’s otherwise fine article reveals that he has yet to realize that Islam is NOT a religion. Islam is a violently expansionist, totalitarian IDEOLOGY that wraps itself in a facade of religious pretense. Any ideology that demands that non-adherents choose either conversion, enslavement or death is not a religion but a death cult and a cult is not a religion.”

I replied: “There are two kinds of people in this world: those who want to defend Western civilization, and those who want to defend religion, to the point that they’ll deny Islam its religious identity, in order to protect the reputation of religion. Islam is a religion and it’s evil, and that’s not a contradiction. People like you have done your part to prolong the Islamic enemy’s war on civilization for religious reasons. Until we accept the fact that Islam is a religion, that 9/11 was as much an act of faith as it was an act or war, this war will continue. But people like you wouldn’t mind that, so long as Islam isn’t recognized as the religion it is. Buck up. This is about defending civilization, Not religion.”

Islam is a religion. 

Comments

  1. Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

    Yes, by definition, Islam IS a religion. But more than that, as a complete way of life–toiled etiquette included–it is a theocracy.

    theocracy and democracy ae antithetical to and incompatible with the other.

    • We have a Republic. The Founding Fathers of America despised democracy for a reason. Democracy is nothing but Mob Rule.

      Many religions command theocracy… i.e. that the religion’s rules become law. And all religions are a complete way of life.

      • We are governed as a representative democracy, and I’m not aware of any other religion that tells the flock how to wipe their butts.

      • Honest Ali: America is both a republic and a democracy. It is a democratic republic, though a representative democracy and not a pure democracy like that of ancient Athens.

        America has more than 80,000 governmental units. Pennsylvania alone has over 2,500. Can’t get much more democratic than this. And in some states, e.g., New Hampshire, the legislature at the most local level—in NH this would be the 234 incorporated towns—is often the citizenry at large and thus in emulation of the pure democracy of ancient Athens.

        And the Founding Fathers of America did not despise democracy but they were worried about mob rule and tyrants and this is why they put in so many checks and balances (e.g., the Electoral College) so the democratic republic they established would work optimally. It will as long as we have an informed citizenry and responsible politicians who don’t put themselves and their party above the interests of the country, something, which if it occurs, and it has occurred, is indicative of a wounded democratic republic and not a healthy one.

      • Honest Ali,

        From my understanding it is only islam, a religious cult that also seeks to establish a global govt under shariah. Early Israel was a Kritarchy, ruled by Judges before instituting a monarchy. The Judges were believed to be representatives of YHWH (Yahweh, and also rendered as Jehovah).

        As on 19-Apr-2018 seven countries had a theocratic from, and all them attributed to islam.

        copy pasted from Google:

        Theocratic movements exist in virtually every country on earth, but true contemporary theocracies are primarily found in the Muslim world, particularly in Islamic states governed by Sharia. Iran and Saudi Arabia are often cited as modern examples of theocratic governments.

    • Agree with PRCS and many thanks to BOSCH FAWSTIN who wrote this ESSENTIAL ARTICLE.

      It’s so important for people who oppose Islam to understand Islam’s RELIGIOUS DIMENSION and how it puts Muslims into a TRANCE of inspiration … false inspiration based on many false ideas. But they defend themselves from seeing the absurdity of Islam’s teachings, because Muslims are IN A TRANCE.

      Once the trance starts to be broken, Muslims can begin to admit the reality of that Islam’s teachings are absurd and morally repulsive.

      What I have just explained is why Islam’s RELIGIOUS DIMENSION is so important for understanding it.

      • Thanks, mortimer. This has been a long-running debate that I expected to be over by now, but here we are, still in the elementary stage of this ongoing ideological battle. We’re going to get there, once we remove the obstacles like the one I wrote about here, but I just can’t say when. In the meantime, we keep writing, fighting, etc.

        • The endless debate is a result of the mistaken attempt to categorize an alien ideology (Islam) using Western cultural assumptions about categories (religious/political). We have a large square peg and smaller round holes. The peg doesn’t fit in either.

          Better to understand that Islam is an ideology with both religious and political aspects but isn’t exactly a religion in the way that our Western, Enlightenment influenced, culture expects a religion to be not political. Islam is political.

      • Islamic sects are rallying flags in today’s turf wars in Europe, Asia and Africa.
        As in the day were Xian churches. They still are in Lebanon, Ethiopia….
        Massive overpopulation in many Muslim countries ensures the war for space and for the primacy of respective sects (eg Sunni and Shia) will grow.

  2. Aztec religion with its human sacrifices… Middle Easterners sacrificing babies to Moloch… Druidic human sacrifices… Roman Emperor worship… Islam.
    Earth has a long history of evil religions.
    And it is OK to criticize them, and fight against them.

  3. When Mohammed was ‘trying to preach & convert folks to his religion,’ he was getting about 10 converts per year. Then he hit upon the idea , ‘let’s do all the bad stuff’. As a member of ‘my Religion’, you can now: rob, rape, murder, enslave anybody who gets in your way’ because now, you have God’s/Allah’s Blessings. At times if persons were captured, given the choice: 1) Have your head chopped off; or, 2) Join us.
    That is why in the Arabic world, you see some wearing Turbans & others wearing a shawl over their heads. The reason for this is historically, the men wearing the shawl like garment, their forefathers back then were Jews.

    That’s why Islam grew. It is nothing more than a Desert Nazi Bandit Death Cult, that hates women etc. & worships perversion & degenerate conduct.

  4. Whether islam is a religion or not is totally meaningless when it comes to recognizing that as an organization, enterprise or entity, it is a criminal conspiracy. While usually religions are protected, criminal conspiracies are not. They are illegal, and every member is charged with all the acts of any member. There is no upper limit on the number of members who can be part of and responsible for a conspiracy. There is no time limit that a conspiracy can exist. The constant self-torture with the question religion or not is a waste. “The knowledge of one is the knowledge of all. The acts of one are the acts of all.”

    A concise description of a conspiracy, to which islam meets every element, is 1) an agreement 2) of 2 or more persons 3) for an illegal purpose or to use illegal means for an otherwise illegal purpose and 4) ANY overt act by ANY participant in furtherance of the goal. Islam makes no secret of its goals to conquer, enslave, loot and kill the entire world which refuses to “convert, submit to humiliation and slavery, or die”. Those goals are contrary to the law.

    To understand the US law on conspiracy, take a few minutes to search for and actually read the case of United States v. Gary Greenough, available for free online, from the Southern District of Alabama, 609 F.Supp 1090 (1985). The law in many other countries and jurisdictions is quite similar. When will it be enforced?

      • M.C., obviously we agree. There is no sense in allowing an obviously criminal conspiracy to continue its highly successful efforts for 1400 years while proclaiming it to be the “religion of peace” and “misunderstood”. I have read approximately 30 books from many authors of a broad spectrum of backgrounds.

        It does not take that much reading to cause a person who has at least a bit of sense to start questioning the delusion of GWB. The first book I read (far later than I wish-7 years after trusting GWB’s proclamation), in response to Glenn Beck hosting Robert Spencer, was the Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades.

        The continuing argument of “religion or not” is as pointless and unproductive as the argument of light being a wave or particle to most people. The fact is that we can use light, whether wave or particle, to see that islam has killed between 250 and 1000 MILLION people in 1400 years and destroyed the lives of billions more over its duration, with the goal of taking the entire world in its death trap.

        • With respect, Frank, I don’t think Islam being a religion or not is a pointless argument since so much wasted time is spent on this bogus matter. Rather, acknowledge Islam as a religion but a wicked one and enough with those who assert that Islam is not a religion. Might as well debate whether Nazism and Marxism are secular ideologies. Of course they are, but they’re evil secular ideologies, contra something like democracy and capitalism which are also secular ideologies but not malevolent, though many fools would argue otherwise.

          Emphasis should be on “evil” and not on “religion.” The adjective is the key, not the noun.

        • W., I suggest the relevant adjective is “illegal”. Nouns like religion, cult, association, club, “charity” have no relevance when hundreds of millions of people have died and billions more enslaved for 1400 years. It is long past time for the useless debates and discussions to end and a decision to be made either to resist effectively or to surrender to slavery and death. In the immortal words we have heard many times and should apply now, it is time for all of us to “Put up or shut up!” As with light, it makes no difference to us who use light to see, whether it is a wave or a particle. Islam kills and enslaves people. That is its only purpose.

        • Frank, neither Nazism nor Marxism are illegal in the America, though the former is looked upon by virtually everyone as evil and most (idiotic academics, certain Democrats, indoctrinated youth and morons in the MSM being exceptions) see Marxism as wicked also. Well, why not with Islam? Don’t try to make it illegal, just have it viewed as the religious equivalent of Nazism, actually its predecessor in many ways by 1300 years. Do this and the rest will take care of itself.

          Forget the “illegal approach.” It’s a dead-end approach.

        • W., your experience in the actual trial practice of law and mine obviously differ.

          Where for decades bankruptcy debtor lawyers routinely treated child support payments as income to the debtor, I decided to argue that they were “property of another held by the debtor in trust” and excluded from the debtor’s income to determine ability to pay. I won.

          Where for decades bankruptcy debtor lawyers spent hours exposing full account numbers to assist in identity theft through their petitions, I fought for limiting the information to prevent that uncontrolled exposure. I won.

          Where for decades the duty of a licensed lawyer to refrain from joining a criminal conspiracy by aiding its goals was ignored in favor of a false duty of non-existent confidentiality, I performed the actual duty to expose and resist that criminal conspiracy. I won.

          I had an advantage. I was the whole office. I had no boss to tell me which cases to take or arguments to make. I had a whole bus load of lawyers who would mentor me and assist in research. I also had the absolute minimum overhead that permitted me for example to keep my small practice going while for 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 7 weeks I typed every letter, and made every one of 70 copies of a 102-page petition to the Supreme Court in proper booklet form so that the record of corruption and incompetence of the Mississippi State Bar and Supreme Court would be known and preserved forever. If you want to see the petition for yourself, contact the Law Library of Congress, Duplication Services, case number 96-501, Anderson v. Mississippi for your complete copy.

          The point is that your suggestion that I forget about islam being a criminal conspiracy has about as much chance of my acceptance as a snowball in the Sahara Desert, or other hot place of your choosing. The legal argument is sound. My research on the subject of conspiracy has been reviewed and supported by a number of lawyers, including a professor who served 2 terms as US Attorney and the Executive Director and General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar. It has been reviewed and published by the Securities Exchange Commission as part of its 1996 record of proceedings concerning the duty of corporate lawyers to report planned and ongoing crime or fraud. My research has also been tested by most of a decade of litigation. NOT ONE SINGLE CASE has ever been cited to the contrary. If it were not you would have a legal argument to the contrary, which you do not and have made no effort to research or compose in the years I have made this observation.

          A criminal conspiracy is just that, a crime. There is nothing criminal about being either a cult or a religion, or for that matter a political movement until there are overt illegal acts in furtherance of the goals. THEN all the members are chargeable with ALL the acts of any member. Between 250 and 1000 MILLION people have been murdered in 1400 year, and more every day, in furtherance of the teachings and goals of islam.

          You have every right to your opinion and to skip reading and responding to my writing. I have the same right and will certainly exercise mine while at least tolerating yours. “Who’s NEXT?”

        • Frank,

          I have no problem with calling Islam a criminal conspiracy. Here we agree. But, profoundly unfortunately, it is a criminal conspiracy that is also a major religion.

          I look at matters from a probability standpoint often times. And I think it was probable, not a given but probable, that mankind would end up with a major religion that is rotten to the core. Mankind did. Mankind got Islam.

          Just as some countries are evil (e.g., North Korea), so can a religion be evil. The main consideration should always be treating with Islam as a religion for the duped, the stupid, the confused, the ignorant and the malevolent.

          Best to you and yours. As always I remain

          A fellow anti-jihadist,

          Wellington

        • W., I celebrate our agreement. One of my favorite passages in non-secret Masonic ritual, straight from the Bible, is “Behold how good and pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity.” I have observed the profound waste of time and energy with the discussion of “religion or not”, comparable to the issue in a will contest, “will or no will”, to understand as long as this discussion continues, time is wasted spinning wheels in the MUD of indecision and confusion. This serves the enemies of liberty and freedom. This is self-defeating and self-destructive behavior that prevents DECISIONS and ACTIONS needed to protect OUR interests, lives and future.

          Can you imagine how many times people have tried to tell me to shut up; and the response they received every time? It makes NO difference whether light is a wave or particle (it exhibits properties of both in the experimental laboratory). To us who use light to see, it is light. We don’t care whether it is wave or particle: it is light. Islam may be a religion, a cult, a political organization and many other things which have NOTHING to do with it being a criminal conspiracy to violate the laws of the United States and the RIGHTS we are supposed to have under the Constitution. Islam meets every element of a criminal conspiracy without exception. And more overt acts by its members are reported here every day.

          I hope we can join in fighting and resisting this goal instead of chasing around in intellectual circles while the world around us burns to the ground in conquest.

        • Frank, I *do* think its important for us to name exactly what we are facing.

          And please note that in my saying this I am *not* telling you to shut up–far from it.

        • GI, while time is being utterly wasted in useless and pointless discussion, the enemy is building strength in numbers, far out-breeding “us”, while killing “us” off.

          Just for example, the worldwide demographic suicide pact of a certain religious community for which I have great appreciation and sympathy, shows that in about 100 years it will essentially disappear. Where it takes an average of 2.1 children per couple to sustain a population, they are below 1.5. And of every 3 marriages, at least 1 is to an outsider, followed by a conversion “out” of the community. All that is required for the enemy of that community to prevail is maintain the ongoing pressure and wait. The problem will solve itself.

          The same is true with this absurd pointless dithering. Either civilization is worth making decisions and commitments or it is not. 1400 years have been spent trying to decide “religion vel non” and “resistance or surrender”. That is the same situation as faced when making the decision to fight or surrender to King George. “Those who cannot remember the lessons of the past are condemned to repeat them.” Jorge Santayana, The Life of Reason (1905). I am not sure how well I would get along generally with John Adams; but on this issue I must agree with his sense of urgency. Please watch and consider 1776.

          Criminal conspiracy can involve a “religion” just as it can involve any other entity or natural person. The law applies to all. The Constitution and the UN Charter (Treaty of London 1945) do not protect criminal conspiracies, whatever the feigned label.

        • I do think it is important for us to define our terms, Frank–but, as you note, also absolutely vital to not get bogged down in minutia as the threat from Islam grows.

        • GI, I BEG you to take whatever time is needed to find and watch 1776. Endless indecision just gives tyranny more time to destroy. Amazon has both Blu-ray and DVD, or at least did last night. They have a 4K coming, which I pre-ordered. John Adams (William Daniels) said it well. PLEASE see for yourself.

      • Excellent essay Michael. Right on target.

        Since Islam is a criminal conspiracy, and criminal conspiracy laws are already on the books, this will make lobbying public support against Islam and connecting the crime to the statute an easier task.

    • Agreed Frank. Excellent post.

      The US Constitution gives no immunity to co-religionists committing crimes in the name or their religion. The US Code gives no indemnity to criminal co-conspirators simply because a “deity” is one of the co-conspirators.

      Though Islam is simultaneously a hostile political ideology, a way of life, a civilization, and a religion, by any etymological definition, these qualifications have no relevance to the issue of “criminal conspiracy” violations of US Code and holding all Muslims to account.

      While informing Kafirs and calling out, ostracizing, and mocking Islam publicly as a horrible, evil, immoral enterprise/religion is indispensable for victory, this alone won’t win the war. A growing population of Muslims in the world believe Islam is great, and no amount of soft persuasion truth-telling, shaming, and discrediting from us will disabuse them from it — certainly not in numbers necessary. Islam is expanding exponentially, with Muslims on Earth rapidly outnumbering Christians by 2050. Simultaneously, the global non-Muslim, non-Hispanic white population is going extinct: For every 20 whites who die each day, only 12 are born. For each 20 Muslim deaths per day, 81 are born.

      Even if 100% of all Kafirs in the world become fully educated in Islamic source doctrine; the complete Robert Spencer catalog; and Islam’s motive, mission, and methods, this will do nothing to mitigate Islam’s motive, mission, and methods, nor the 1.8 Billion Muslims’ commitment to it.

      Winning this war requires a comprehensive campaign involving many required strategic and tactical elements including, but not limited to, Kafir education; Psyops/education/propaganda targeting Ummah; lawfare to enforce criminal conspiracy codes and create any necessary additional legislation; domestic judicial, police, and National Guard force; and international kinetic military force — a lot of it — because the Ummah won’t be surrendering this war without a fight.

      • D.T., One of the most common and frequently used excuses for inaction is that more legislation is needed before action is possible. That is absolute nonsense, or more colorful words if they are in your vocabulary. Under federal rules, an expert is a person who by virtue of education, experience or both is qualified to give opinion testimony that may be helpful to the trier of fact. I AM a licensed lawyer in 2 states, now on retired status. That means the supreme courts of 2 states continue to vouch for my character, competence and fitness to practice law, to advise clients and represent them in legal proceedings. I am also one of the victims of a conspiracy which included one of those supreme courts, its state bar and the United States Supreme Court.

        At the time I took and passed the Mississippi bar exam in 1981, an applicant was entitled to receive his license without taking the test by diploma privilege. That means he graduated from the University of Mississippi Law School before 1983. BUT he was denied a license because he claimed his class rank was #7 instead of #70 on his resume; which was found and reported by a law firm which considered him for employment. The point is that the slightest falsehood can be enough to refuse or take a lawyer’s license. If one state takes a license, others take theirs by “automatic reciprocity”. I still have my Alabama and Mississippi licenses.

        For brevity, I am not including citations. If you question my claims, believe me, citations are readily available. Among others, my research and litigation on the subject of conspiracy has been reviewed by one of my law professors, who at different times was an FBI agent, state judge and 2 term US Attorney. His support and encouragement in favor of my conclusions was obtained before I began my war.

        A federal witness is defined before the Victims and Witnesses Protection Act of 1982 as any person who has material information and expects to, is expected to or does testify. Before the Act it was limited to administrative and judicial proceedings. After the act, all federal proceedings were included, Illegal conduct before the Act did not become legal after its becoming LAW.

        The day I returned from my honeymoon in 1982 my employer’s internal auditor greeted me at my office with 3 copies of the same memo: his original, the original with 5 paragraphs crossed out and orders that they be removed, and the memo as the boss’s secretary re-typed it without the auditor’s signature or initials. I was looking both at the completed and ongoing crimes of 18 United State Code 1001, endeavoring to conceal, or to supply misleading, material information to an agency of the federal government, and obstruction of justice under 18 USC 1505 and 1512. OUR employer was a federally financed and mortgaged electric cooperative in a title theory state. That means until the mortgage is paid in full, the whole company is federal property which was routinely regulated in every detail by federal agents who were part and parcel of the conspiracy.

        When I spoke with our boss, the general manager, he ordered me to join a conspiracy to “harass, oppress and intimidate” the auditor into remaining silent about the ongoing theft of 200 million dollars in 1982 present value through a fraudulent coal contract. I refused. I was fired, blackballed and unemployed for most of 2 years.

        I filed a lawsuit. The new general manager at the same time did three acts: Obtained a gag order from the state court where I filed my suit, prohibiting me from speaking to anyone in the world save the one lawyer who was assisting me. He filed in 2 federal courts 3 written, sworn statements which named me among others “a person who will necessarily testify in any hearing of this matter”. And he filed a bar complaint with the Mississippi State Bar, which the state court order prohibited me from answering.

        When the matter was presented to the Mississippi Supreme Court on a Motion for a Writ of Prohibition, the court allowed the bar to continue its prosecution for talking with a director, talking with a federal agent and filing a lawsuit. After years of delay, I won. Then when I tried to sue for the total destruction of my life, including loss of everything except my life and licenses, the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied me any opportunity to present my claims, contrary to the Mississippi Constitutional provision which says the courts shall be open, and every person shall have remedy by due course of law for injury done him in his lands, goods and reputation. I then spent 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 7 weeks to prepare and file in proper booklet form (a total of 70 copies required) a 102-page Petition for Writ of Certiorari, including Appendix to ask the US Supreme Court to let my suit be heard. While the petition was pending Circuit Justice Antonin Scalia flew to Mississippi to speak at the University of Mississippi Law School. After he returned to Washington, my petition was denied. I have never heard of another such visit by a sitting justice while a case was pending.

        The Alabama State Bar has supported and encouraged me every step along the way.

        The law already exists. The problem is that enforcement of law depends on corrupt people in charge of the prosecutors and courts. I still have my licenses. A copy of my petition can be obtained from the Law Library of Congress, Duplication Services, case 96-501, Anderson v. Mississippi.

        • You are a principled man, Frank.

          And I agree that we don’t need more laws to take a stand against Jihad–we just need to enforce the civilized laws we have now.

  5. Excellent essay by Bosch Fawstin. I agree wholeheartedly with it. Well done.

    Pursuing a strategy that Islam is not a religion is a fool’s errand. It is a religion but a very evil one. This should be the starting point in dealing with Islam. It pretty much was for the West for some 1300 years but then the West went sappy and sloppy and the result has been a sanitizing of Islam which is suicidal and as wrong as averring that Islam is not a religion at all.

    Islam is a religion. And it is evil. This should be the starting point for treating with it.

    • Thanks, Wellington. That this has to continue to be argued just shows how far removed we are from where we need to be in the ideological side of this war. But we’ll get there.

      • Yup. That’s just what the World is missing and needs today — a good all-out religious war. We haven’t had one in a while. That’ll spruce things up.

        • So calling to recognize the islamic enemy’s religious war on us will somehow start a religious war? We *are* in a religious war, as Islam’s true believers are waging a religious war against civilization. Recognizing this reality is the only way we can effectively respond to it. Continuing to deny it is why we are where we are, constantly empowering a weak enemy who is willing to do anything. And in a nuclear age, we know where that leads.

        • Rarely

          We’ve been in one since 2001, only that only one of the sides has been fighting, while the other has been pretending that it doesn’t exist. Maybe we’ll wise up in time. Or maybe not

        • We’ve already been in a religious war for the last 1400 years. Per the Islamic source doctrine, sacrosanct in perfection and eternally immutable, the war must continue until the world is either 100% Islamic, or 0% Islamic.

        • Rarely–with all respect–your belief that acknowledging that Islam is a religion constitutes a religious war is mistaken.

          Then, the ones intent on waging a religious war are *Jihadists*, not those who hope to defend against it.

  6. Making a point that drives this to a personal decision to be made regarding Islam yes or Islam no envision yourselves subjected to people with beards and head coverings all around you.

    You now live under religious Islamic rule (Sharia).

    The above places you in the hands of religious believers of Sharia.

    You no longer will be told to have a nice day, you will no longer be able to go to a park, a mall, a school, a job, a doctors visit, a sporting event, you become the target of Sharia where daily subjugation/ daily humiliation, and a real feeling of death can and will be upon you should you believe you are free.

    The above is life on earth today for Christians stuck in this world living under Sharia among those with beards and head coverings, it is their world and you are their dhimmi.(non-Muslim subject of an Islamic state)

    Your caretakers are your neighbors, there will be no police/ government/human rights/ or any other entity available to file a grievance, you are guilty in perpetuity.

    Include this reality when absorbing the article written about Is Islam a Religion while envisioning those you love and their future and take a moment a put yourselves in the place of Christians living under such today now in the twenty first century.

  8. As usual, I disagree. Islam is a religion only in the same way that Communism or Nazism is a religion or Wokism is a religion. The point we make when we assert that islam is not a religion is that it should not be bunched w/ faiths like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and so on: it’s degrading to the latter to bunch islam w/ them

    Instead, islam is a geopolitical cult. Geopolitical in that it has strong resemblances to Communism and Nazism. Cult in that it’s very similar to the Branch Davidians of 1993, or the Hashashins of medieval Iran and Syria. In other words, if one wants to put it into categories, that’s where it should be grouped

    To this day, I’ve not seen anyone effectively refute Ali Sina’s description of why islam is more a cult than a religion

    https://www.faithfreedom.org/islam-cult-or-religion

    And hopefully, one of these days, I’ll get to Rebecca Bynum’s book: Allah is dead: why Islam is not a religion

      • Yeah, I hope to get to that book – it’s in my Nook bookshelf. Maybe I’ll go directly to it, and then return to RS’ book ‘Did Muhammad exist’, which I was just 2 chapters into

    • Infidel,

      Thanks for the valuable info on books. I agree with you that it is demeaning to club peaceful religions to an evil-to-the-core one.

      While I found the discussion on the subject to be very useful, especially by learned Wellington, Frank, I hope we are not falling in the trap of Marxism which has defined most of today’s definitions.

      I have my apprehension about the usage of word religion (for islam) because there is at least a billion people in the world (considering most Indians) who have awe for religion and state that a RELIGION CANNOT BE BAD. So here we are: Did the chicken come first or the egg?

    • Infidel wrote:

      As usual, I disagree. Islam is a religion only in the same way that Communism or Nazism is a religion or Wokism is a religion.
      …………………

      You are mistaken, Infidel–these like Islam are also ideologies, but are not religions. Definition *is* important.

      As for Islam being a cult, by main definition a cult is just a small religion. I wish Islam *were* small, but it is not.

      I presume you are using “cult” in the sense of weird or malign–but this slang definition of “cult” has only been around since the 1970s, when so many odd cults sprang up. Islam has as you know been around a lot longer than this.

      • If the category choices for Islam were limited to Religion or Cult, Islam would have to be considered a Religion. I vaguely recall an obscure televised lecture by a rabbi who asserted that the difference between a religion and a cult is a hundred years. By that rule, Jehovah’s Witnesses became a Religion in the 1970s whereas Scientology will remain a Cult for another 30 some years should it persist that long. But we are not bound to those two categories and are free to exclude Islam from both and place it elsewhere, somewhere that better conforms to our understanding of it..

        • You can “place” Islam elsewhere, Tom, but only if you want to redefine the meaning of our words for Muslims.

  9. Philippians 3:19 Their end is destruction, their god is …
    https://biblehub.com/philippians/3-19.htm
    “Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things. (New Living Translation ) “They are headed for destruction. ”

    John 15:13 Greater love has no one than this, that he lay …
    https://biblehub.com/john/15-13.htm
    “No one has greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for his friends.”

    With those two verses, two important points: The first is, that one can truthfully see that if something…anything…is the object or focus of a person’s *devotion, or worship, obedience,* then that person has a *religion,* even if it is not recognized as a religion, but thought of as an obsession.
    This includes “cults.”

    The second point is; Christ said that a person would have no greater “love” than to “give his soul ***on behalf of his friends.*** This is self-sacrifice, but it is not done for just anyone….not for those who are making a serious, constant attempt to kill the one who is willing to sacrifice his soul “on behalf of his friends.”

    In the days of the early Israelites, they came to the Land of Canaan where the inhabitants of that land sacrificed their children to their false gods, believing these would make their crops grow. They had temple prostitutes who were there for the populace to consort with and produce children for sacrifice.
    This was *religion* and it was evil.

    moloch or molech…was a “false god” who had a raging fire inside its image and children were thrown into it in **religious** sacrifice. The God of the Israelites condemned this religion and said that He “had never commanded such, nor was the thought ever in His Heart.”
    This worship of moloch/molech was an evil, demonic religion.

    There were ba’al worshippers in the Land of Israel and God’s prophets called them out for their *worship* of false gods. Jezebel was a ba’al worshipper and had God’s prophets murdered.
    King Jehu tricked the ba’al worshippers and many were killed; because they were evil. He also fooled Jezebel.

    islam follows the pattern of these ancient…and demonically evil…religions. The reason for this: they all have the same source; they all serve the same false ‘god.’ The mozlums of today, worship the same entity that the people in the ancient land of Canann, the followers of ba’al and molech worshipped.

    Christians, most of all, should recognize that religion can be evil, and there is much evidence to prove it.

    One must see the Truth or they will believe the Lie. islam is an evil religion, a worship/devotion to an evil entity and false ‘god.’

  10. Actually, Islam is indeed a religion. One very important thing is to be properly defined and understood specifically what kind of religion it really is.

    So it be, rightly, said “Islam is a religious /political/ Sharia based mind control system that has complete and total power and influence over the beliefs, ideas thoughts and behavior over millions of people around the world.”

    With this definition the wisdom of the words of Thomas Jefferson may well apply to this subject.
    For Mr. Jefferson wrote “I have sworn upon the alter of God eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man.”

  11. Islam really is a religion. With that statement Islam may better be understood by the Greek philosopher Plato is one of the contributors to Western Civilization. He may shed some light into the subject of those people who are shackled in the chains and darkness of Islamic thought.

    In Plato’s REPUBLIC he gave an allegory of a cave where “the condition of men living in a sort of cavernous chamber…Here they have been from childhood, chained by leg and also by the neck, so that they cannot move and see only what is in front of them.”

    This can fit into what the Imams do in the mosques and how they brainwash the young people in the madrassa’s by always programming Islamic doctrine into their victims and not exposing them to other worldviews. Furthermore, even in Islamic tradition when Muslims have their newborn child the father whispers words of the Quran into the infants ear so that that Quran verses are the first thing the newborn person hears.

    This programming process takes place all their lives. These are some of the chains that keep them bound in a mosque [cave]. The chains do not let them reach out for dialectic reasoning and let them examine the evidence both for as well as against, or even question whether Muhammad was a true prophet of God or not, and if the Quran is a hoax or not. As the chains and darkness of the cave blinds and holds the prisoners back from reality, so Islamic propaganda holds back the cognition to reason with the question if Islam is true or not.

    They are forbidden from even thinking to question Islam. Furthermore, if a Muslim by some miracle wakes up to the truth about Islam, it would be like the man in Plato’s cave allegory who was released from his chains and taken outside to the real world. At first direct light would be painful and disorienting, it would take some time for him to understand what the truth is all about, he even might cling to the shadows and still for a time believe some of the illusions to be real. But he would finally come to know “what he had formerly seen was meaningless illusion.” And that was “what passed for wisdom in his former dwelling place and that the other cave prisoners also needed to see the light [the truth] for he “was sorry for them.” and he would re-enter the cave just to rescue them. Nevertheless, the cave prisoners wouldn’t understand and “if they could lay hand on the man who was trying to set them free.” And if they could “they would kill him.”

    Likewise, when someone escapes from the shackles of Islam, those still in the darkness of this religion would not understand and if possible kill him for leaving Islam, and even more so if he were to try to enlighten them about the truth about Islam. For these people in Islam are chained to an empty imitation of truth and godliness.

  12. We should be asking as Muslims why the disbelievers despise Islam. Here a are a few points.

    1) Islam didn’t come to please the desires of nonmuslims. The nonmuslims drink alcohol, eat pork, commit adultery, and gamble. All of this is considered to be the work of the devil so of course the nonmuslims will shun Islam because Islam doesn’t allow the consumption of Jack Daniels and pork baby back ribs.

    2) The nonmuslims don’t like Islam because Islam doesn’t allow adultery. How can the disbelievers who sleep with different women be happy. They all believe that they have freedom to do whatever is evil. Islam allows a man to get married up to four wives but that’s considered backwards to disbelievers. They all want us Muslims to be progressives like themselves by sleeping with different men and women even if were married.

    3) The disbelievers also despise the Hijab that covers a Muslim women’s head. Women in Islam keep their private parts covered only for their husbands. The nonmuslims don’t like this because they don’t believe in commitment so they sleep around with everyone.

    • No, “Tony”! The reasons we infidels loathe islam are many, but here is the salient one: the command of islam to despise unbelievers and offer them 3 choices: conversion, dhimmitude/exile or war/death. That’s been the history of islam since the Abbasids, and as your own texts say, it has to end one way or the other – either w/ an islamic victory, or islam being wiped out of the face of the earth

      • Infidel,

        Your idea though praiseworthy is too far to be accomplished in immediate future. But I hope the days are nearing. Right now we have the Left that is in shameful genocide mode in Ukraine and this should enlighten the world about the evils of left to present generations.

        Next, the world should take note of islam as a flareup is soon to take place in mid east, thanks to US, Iran et al and the bad deal with Iran.

    • Conniving 7th-century barbarians whose knowledge of the earth and the universe was limited to a very, very tiny piece of the huge planet we live on plagiarized other religions to create a theocratic “complete way of life” to control, exploit, and conquer others.

      As to hijab:

      1) Not just a scarf, of course, the primary purpose as “revealed” by whoever wrote Qur’an 33:59 was to distinguish and identify free, chaste Muslim women in order to avoid the public abuses of Muslim mem, leaving “unbelieving” women and slave women to their tender mercies. While that nonverbal expression of 7th century Islamic supremacism should have no place in the 21st century, not even in monolithic Muslim nations, it has absolutely none in polylithic nations.

      2) Qur’an 24:31, the so-called modesty passage, crafted afterward, permits a Muslim woman to be viewed–uncovered–by her slaves and eunuchs–to this day.

      Rational, informed people know that Islam, that Qur’an, was created by men.

    • This vile “Tony” wrote:

      We should be asking as Muslims why the disbelievers despise Islam. Here a are a few points.
      …………………

      “Disbelievers” despise Muslim crushing of freedom and most of all its hideous violence. This is the sort of thing that Abdul here is most proud of.

      More:

      1) Islam didn’t come to please the desires of nonmuslims. The nonmuslims drink alcohol, eat pork, commit adultery, and gamble. All of this is considered to be the work of the devil so of course the nonmuslims will shun Islam because Islam doesn’t allow the consumption of Jack Daniels and pork baby back ribs.
      …………………

      Note that pious Muslims like Abdul here consider taking a drink, eating spare ribs, or tossing a couple of dollars into the Superbowl betting pool evil, but are fine with robbery, piracy, rape, slavery, and mass murder. There is no morality in Islam.

      As for “adultery” note that pious Muslims consider being raped “committing adultery”. Many of the women in prison in Dar-al-Islam are rape victims, and rape victims have been stoned to death for the crime of reporting their rape.

      More:

      2) The nonmuslims don’t like Islam because Islam doesn’t allow adultery. How can the disbelievers who sleep with different women be happy. They all believe that they have freedom to do whatever is evil. Islam allows a man to get married up to four wives but that’s considered backwards to disbelievers. They all want us Muslims to be progressives like themselves by sleeping with different men and women even if were married.
      …………………

      Ludicrous claim. Note that Abdul doesn’t mention monogamy–the idea of man and wife actually loving each other is alien to Islam.

      Polygamy is allowed–as is raping Infidel women and girls in Jihad, and taking as many sex slaves as they can get their hands on. This is actually characterized as “chaste” in the Qur’an.

      Sick, sick stuff.

      More:

      3) The disbelievers also despise the Hijab that covers a Muslim women’s head. Women in Islam keep their private parts covered only for their husbands. The nonmuslims don’t like this because they don’t believe in commitment so they sleep around with everyone.
      …………………

      Women in Islam are forced to wear the Hijab, and are imprisoned, beaten, and murdered if they do not.

      And the purpose of the Hijab is not modesty–it is to indicate to Muslim men which women can be raped. Just appalling.

      And Abdul’s mention of “committment” here is grotesque–as if polygamy, forced marriage, the instant “Triple Talaq” divorce for men only, and the raping of sex slaves is indictive of “committment” is grotesque.

      As for Muslim women, if you wear a garment because you may be killed if you don’t, this is not indicative of committment either. *Ugh*.

  13. Wrong. Islam is not a religion. It’s a political, military movement masquerading as a religion.

    • Tom, Islam is a religion by all definition. There is nothing in the definition of religion that says it cannot also be political and military, as Islam is.

  15. Islam is a cult dictatorship controlling every aspect of human life. I guess for those who want to be lead around by their nose it works. But if you want freedom and liberty Islam is the kiss of death.

  16. Problem here is that Islamic sources themselves – as in widely-used textbooks for Muslim students in US madrassas – state in bold-face type that “Islam is not a religion”.

    Reason is that for them, that is too constraining a description – and they go on to say “Islam is a complete way of life”.

    I say we listen to what they call themselves.

    • Problem here is that Islamic sources themselves – as in widely-used textbooks for Muslim students in US madrassas – state in bold-face type that “Islam is not a religion”.
      ………………

      This is absurd–they say no such thing. Citations, please.

      • Available on Amazon.com

        What Is Islam All About? by Yahiya Emerick

        https://www.amazon.com/What-Islam-All-About-Hardcover/dp/1933269022/ref=pd_sbs_4/132-2844451-1377545?pd_rd_w=5y6eO&pf_rd_p=4b6b5072-e9bd-4f30-a3af-a1f5d52978ec&pf_rd_r=64GX0RP5Q0TW2RDYWHFF&pd_rd_r=825a9a01-bd7e-47c0-bd83-ad6b3cdd437f&pd_rd_wg=aCS8t&pd_rd_i=1933269022&psc=1

        Middle School Textbook for US madtrassas – see pg. 2

        Also: Learning About Islam by Yahiya Emerick

        https://www.amazon.com/Learning-About-Islam-Revised-Expanded/dp/1933269014/ref=sr_1_2?crid=352TDZPDY55FN&keywords=learning+about+islam%2C+yahiya+emerick&qid=1647731659&s=books&sprefix=learning+about+islam%2C+yahiya+emerick%2Cstripbooks%2C54&sr=1-2

        See pg. 2: “Islam is not a Religion”

        • Clare, firstly citing a single author–a notorious Taqiyya artist at that–as proof that Islam does not consider itself a religion is silly.

          Then, Yahiya Emerick *himself* refers to Islam as a religion in the very Amazon page you link to. He also refers to Islamic “prophets” as “holy” and uses (PBUH)–a religious honorific–about the foul “Prophet” Muhammed.

          I’m not going to order this book to see his exact phrasing here–which you refuse to cite.

          Muslims regularly say that Islam is not *just* a religion in the sense Jews and Christians and Hindus use the term, but is also a compkete way of life.

          Thinking that this is a denial that Islam is a religion is, I’m afraid, missing the point. Muslims very much believe that Islam is a religion–it is refered to as such over and over again in the Qur’an.

        • Well, but issue here is that this is what’s being taught in US madrassas to Muslim students….somebody approves of this for instruction of the next generation – all we can do is quote them

        • GI, please help me see why time is spent discussing whether or not islam is a religion? Obviously from my comments for years, I fail to see why the “debate” continues. What is gained by the expenditure (waste) of time and effort? I suggest my analogy of the research on the physics question of whether light is a wave or particle is appropriate to show that to actual users of light, as opposed to researchers in the laboratory, light is light, whether wave or particle. Is there are reason to avoid the conclusion that islam may be many “things” while at the same time being an illegal conspiracy with the goal of destroying the world? Whether islam is a religion or not, it proclaims and practices its goals of murder, conquest, slavery, looting and oppression. Endless discussion just delays action that is vital to stopping its success.

          Think about the wonderful movie 1776 and John Adams frustration with the endless debate over what to do in response to the King’s tyranny? “Resistance must start somewhere!” Will it start too late for its success?

        • The definition matters because of our 1A. If Islam is a religion & only a religion, it qualifies for 1A protection. Individual people, believers, have that protection in any case, so long as their behavior remains within the limits of the US Constitution & laws derived from it.

          If, however, Islam the belief system is better defined as a legal system (shariah) that is obviously antithetical to our US Constitution on many counts, then we are talking about Article VI of that Constitution.

          If it’s whatever its devotes say it is, whenever & however they wish to state it, then we have confusion…like here.

        • g,

          Not only do mozlums consider islam a religion, but in the statement from the oic, they are the “only religion.” When they demanded that “religion” not be criticized, they meant “only” islam.

        • Clare, I note that you *still* will *not* put that quote here. Yahiya Emerick calls Islam a religion several times in the pieces I linked to.

        • Frank, I think it is important that we properly define our terms. There are those who insist we change the definition of our words for Islam, whch I think is much mistaken. Dealing with truth is actually important to our fight.

        • GI, while this endless and pointless effort to “define” terms continues, islam continues its death march of conquest. Once islam is recognized as meeting every precise element of a criminal conspiracy, the issue of “religion or not” (in legal terms, “religion vel non”) means nothing. I ask you to do 2 actions: Watch 1776 again to see a good illustration of intransigence and stall; and read United States v. Gary Greenough to see what comprises a criminal conspiracy. (Southern District of Alabama, 1985, 609 F.Supp 1090, available for free online). Just like King George was given endless time to impose his wishes on the colonies, muslims are being given endless time by this useless debate. Islam is a criminal conspiracy to conquer, kill, enslave and destroy the world.

        • Dear Frank, I haven’t seen 1776–but I will look for it. I’ll also look up and read United States v. Gary Greenough (although I have read other material about the legal definion of conspiracy).

          Here’s a link to that case:

          https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/782/1556/299516/

          I’ll reply here again when I’ve had a chance to read it through.

          And Frank, I don’t want you to think that I spend all my time arguing that Islam is a religion to the detriment of opposing its horrors–I assure you I do not.

        • GI, 1776 is a movie with a stellar cast telling about the stormy negotiation and signing of the Declaration of Independence. It is a musical starring several actors you would recognize and appreciate. I have related to John Adams since seeing it for the first time when it was released to celebrate the bicentennial.

          This “religion vel non” discussion is doing the same thing as happened until it was almost too late to take a stand against the King. Get on with the work-THEY are already at WORK and WAR, and have been for 1400 years. The movie should be available on DVD.

        • GI, I checked Amazon to find 1776 is available on Blu-ray and DVD, and for pre-order in 4K.

        • Frank, if you are a fan of John Adams–as I am–have you read David McCullough’s fine biography? Also excellent is the HBO miniseries made from the book. Although I like Paul Giamatti, I thought he was an odd choice to play the lead; but he is actually spot on. The first two episodes are especially good.

        • GI, Mary is entering her “dotage”. We have many “honey-do’s” that take nibbles. I am weak from the heart disease and medications required for several problems. There are several books waiting on my Kindle to be read at the moment. I hope some of these are completed where I could have time to read the suggestion. Thank you.

        • Dear Frank, I was *not* pestering you to read this book or see this miniseries–I know your health is not at its best. Just suggesting you might enjoy them both if you get the chance.

        • GI, please KNOW in totally perfect and unmistakable terms how much you are respected and appreciated. I had extremely good news from my cardiologist and very sad news from the vet who cares for Mary’s 18 plus year old Chow. For most of us, life goes on, a little bit slower, and more painfully than in the past. But, take it from someone who had to survive many years with very few friends, it is always better with friends. I hope many of the “honey-do’s” get done so that another book on Kindle can be undertaken soon. Yes, I am a fan of John Adams as he is portrayed in 1776. I also am “obnoxious and disliked”! ALWAYS, my very best wishes to you and all you hold dear. Frank

  17. Islam is a religion – an evil religion.

    The problem is that a large percent of people in the West, wrongfully, that *any* religion must have some *good* qualities.

    And being categorized as a religion in the United States, islam takes advantage of:

    1. Religious legal protections.

    2. Tax benefits.

    • And that – is the problem w/ that classification. An evil religion getting tax benefits, on top of their zakats, to fund their jihad, and religious legal protections for things that they do that would otherwise run afoul of the law

      • Infidel,

        I agree with you – that is the problem with that classification (assuming that islam is legally classified as a religion).

        But we are currently stuck with it – that classification is even used by the IRS regarding tax benefits for mosques, etc.

        I guess that it boils down to this:

        Should islam in the United States continue to be classified as a religion (rather than a political entity) when its basic tenets encourage criminal / terrorist activities?

        If no, then:

        How would the Free Exercise Clause in the US Constitution be dealt with vis-à-vis Islam?

        I’m not an attorney – and I encouraged attorneys to weigh in.

      • I agree that Islam should not get tax breaks–it should take more than being a religion to attain that. This presupposes that all religions are of societal benefit.

  18. Good to see so many thoughtful comments spring from a very well written piece.

    Your point about the way that the ummah views religion and it’s place in a society versus how we in the post-Enlightenment West view the importance of religion is an interesting one indeed. It seems that despite all the socialist rhetoric and indoctrination, most who make up the “secular” West still harbor deep Judeo-Christian morals beneath their veiled exterior.

    I’ve definitely never seen many muslims fret or self shame themselves over their history of slavery, this in spite of the much more recent and even contemporary existence of the practice in the islamic world. Nor is there much reflection on the sectarian wars that have ravaged the “religion of peace” throughout it’s bloody history.

    No matter how hard the former Christians try to shake the characteristics that have defined our societies – compassion, charity, good will to all, etc. – it is ingrained upon their souls. The same is true of islam, which has impressed the traditions of supremacy, contempt and subjugation on their spirits for 14 long centuries. It will take more than a period of enlightenment to break these bonds.

    • I don’t think most in the West try to shake these values. Of course, assuming that Islam holds this same morality is a real problem.

  19. Islam IS a Religion
    ……………….

    Yes–Islam *is* a religion. There is nothing in the definition of religion that says that a religion has to be either good or true.

    Islam is an *evil* religion.

    And there have been other malignant religions before–the worship of Ba’al and the religion of the Aztecs, both of which involved human sacrifice.

    Many religions are benignant or at least involved benignant aspects; Islam does not.

    As for Christianity, Christians, includng very devout Christians, *have* successfully fought Islam before. Both misguided Christians and Muslim thugs demand that if Christians are “true” Christians that they will refuse to defend themselves against Islamic conquest, rape, and slaughter. But Christianity is not a suicide pact, and allowing evil to flourish and harm others is *not* evidence of saintliness.

  20. Islam claims to be a monotheistic religion in which Allah is the omnipotent creator. Its claim is undermined by the fact that the Qur’an refers to Allah as “The best of creators”. It mentions that Isa, son of Mary blew life unto clay birds which he had formed. There may be other creators as well in Islam.

    Allah himself cannot have a son without the sexual act with “one of his own”, a consort which does not fit well with the claim of monotheism. But he has daughters to his dismay! How did he get them?

    At the same time the Qur’an puts great efforts into its description of Isa’s virgin birth! That apparently was not caused by Allah, but by a spirit which is independent of him.

    As a religion Islam appears inconsistent and confused, a fact which needs to be openly discussed and which should not be given special protection because the facts might offend or embarrass the believers.

    The problem is the incompatible nature of Islam in terms of its believers’ lived religion relative to other religions and the law of the land. Islam is a religion of self righteousness which on a daily basis breaks all kinds of laws, including conventions on human rights and war crimes.

    Any and all countries which consider to extend rights of domicile to Muslims should make it mandatory for them to study and be examined on special editions of the Qur’an which make it clear which conflicts exist between the commands of the Qur’an and the laws of the land.

    The examination should conclude with an oath of allegiance to the host country and its laws.

    • I agree with you. Except, that even if they take an oath of allegiance they will still do as they have been taught from birth and that is to wage war for islam> they will lie in order to get inside the country< just as that one terrorist who said he "sweared but didn't mean it."

      • S.H., what happened to the muslim rule that all oaths and promises made by muslims are meaningless? They are effective only so long as they are convenient. Especially when made to low-life, useless, scum of the earth kafir infidels like us? No oath taken by a muslim to “support, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic” means spit. It is totally delusional to imagine otherwise for anyone who reads here, especially those of us who write here. Lying is not just permitted: Lying is encouraged whenever advantage can be obtained by the deception. Frank

        • I agree. People like i.elmi, alias omar, tlaib, ellison, and the others who sit on seats of judgment in courts (how many, Idk), and the one in charge of making sure there is religious freedom biden put in office…are all liars and in office to further islam.

          Unless they are admitting to the evil, everything they say can be declared as a lie.
          They’ll freely brag that the fake prophet…whom they worship…raped little girls; and his enemies, he murdered/had them murdered, but if an infidel points this out, mozlums lie and say not so.

          One was once commanded to “swear to tell the truth, the whole and nothing but,” until one day it wasn’t necessary any more to swear. And mozlums take their fake oath on their book of evil filth. It would be no good if they actually meant it.

        • Thank you. Remember, what I write here is my “message in a bottle” to someone who may come looking in the future. For that reason, I try to keep my thoughts in what I believe a truthful and honorable direction. I wish I had such writing from my official adopted father and uncle. How would we like to be remembered? Frank

        • How we are remembered is important–as i whatever positive influence we can have now. (Of course, these two are often intertwined).

  21. This is an excellent article that makes an important point via well-informed arguments and clear, compelling language. All counter-jihadis & defenders of Western Civilization need to take Fawstin’s message to heart.

    As a godless heathen, I’ve got no skin in the game of defending religion as a whole, or any particular faith. I’m not a fan of any religion (unless pantheism counts), but I acknowledge the obvious fact that the “Great Religions” of the world are not basically the same. All religions do not promote the same basic moral code. And all religions do NOT pose an equal threat to human rights, animal welfare, free societies, or the civilized world.

    Islam clearly IS a religion, for all the reasons Bosch Fawstin provides. But it’s ALSO a brutal and oppressive legal system straight out of 7th Century Arabia, AND a militant and imperialistic political system whose Prime Directive is to wage war on the non-Muslim world (by any & every means) until the entire planet is ruled by Islam — THE most savage, inhumane, toxic ideology that has ever blighted the Earth.

    Because Islam is uniquely dangerous, in a sane world, it would be treated differently from other religions and political ideologies. It should be singled out as the unique threat it is, and not given the same legal protections extended to other religions. Islam should be banned in all free, civilized societies — while they still retain some degree of freedom and civilized behavior. In the U.S., the Constitution needs to be amended to make Islam (and Muslims) unwelcome. If we fail to do this, eventually the uppity, fast-breeding Muslims living among us will replace the ENTIRE Constitution with Sharia. Amend it now, or lose it later! Other Western countries need to take similar steps, for the same reasons.

    As Fawstin says, our focus should be on preserving Western Civilization, which is now in far greater peril than ever before, because the war being waged upon it today by the unholy alliance of Muslim immigrants and the PC fools of the Regressive Left is far more insidious and multi-faceted than any previous world war. And we should NOT be restrained by the fact that Islam is a religion (among other things).

    • Savvy Kaffir, I agree with most of what you say here. I don’t think that changing our Consititution for Muslims is the best idea, though. Most of the practice of Islam is criminalized as it stands–we just need to enforce these laws.

      • We wouldn’t be amending our Constitution “for” Muslims. We’d be amending it “against” Muslims and their toxic ideology.

        If we allow Muslims to remain among us in the U.S. and other Western countries, as far as the ultimate outcome is concerned, it doesn’t matter how stringently we enforce our existing laws now, or in the near future. Once their numbers are great enough, Muslims will be calling the shots. They will replace our Constitution with Sharia. As I said before, we either AMEND it or LOSE it entirely. History bears this out, around the world, wherever Islam has been allowed to take root and grow.

        The U.S. Constitution has been amended many times for reasons FAR less compelling than this. The future of America as a free, civilized society is at stake here. The same applies to other Western nations. This is an existential struggle. If we look far enough down the road, it really is all or nothing. The basic nature of Islam allows for nothing else. There’s no third option in which Muslims coexist within a civilized society on a long-term basis.

        • Savvy Kaffir, this would still be changing the Constitution and the First Amendment for Muslims. The First Amendment is one of the bulwarks protecting our freedom of speech, and i don’t want to see it weakened.

          I have said before–many times–that we should stanch the invasion of Muslims into the West. The “Muslim ban” was a good first step. Then we should start deporting Muslims, beginning with the worst Jihadists.

        • Islam is an acid that eats away at free speech & other human rights. Ridding the country of Islam/Muslims would not weaken the First Amendment; it would safeguard that key amendment, and the rest of the Constitution, ensuring that they are never replaced by Sharia.

          Amending the Constitution to single out Islam as the uniquely hostile & toxic ideology it is, and Muslims as the active agents of that ideology, is essential if the U.S. is to survive as a free & civilized society. Rather than weakening or watering down the Constitution, some of the most important amendments, such as the First & the Second, have greatly enhanced & strengthened the Constitution. A new amendment that bans Islam and calls for the expulsion of Muslims would likewise make the Constitution a more powerful and FAR more durable blueprint for democracy.

          Strictly enforcing our existing laws would only safeguard our freedoms temporarily, until the Demographic Jihad brings about a major power shift and Muslims dispense with the Constitution entirely, replacing it with Sharia. And, long before that evil day, the insane alliance of Muslims & the Regressive Left would effectively gut the First Amendment, a process that’s already well underway — and deprive us of Second Amendment rights, thereby making us more vulnerable, both as individuals and as freedom fighters & defenders of the Constitution.

          Also, while the enforcement of existing laws might temporarily keep the majority of Muslims in line, it would not protect us from the violent jihadis living among us — the hardcore Allah junkies who are entirely disdainful of all man-made laws, and ready to sacrifice their lives for their idiotic, brutal religion. In a Big Picture sense, the most compelling motivation for turning back the Muslim invasion of the West is not terrorism, but the danger Islam poses to free, civilized societies as a whole. But it’s morally reprehensible to allow these savages to continue murdering and maiming innocent men, women, & children. And the ONLY way to put an end to that is to rid the country of ALL Muslims, since it’s impossible to sort out the “moderate” Muslims from the True Believers, and equally impossible to predict which of those friendly, easygoing Muslims will one day decide to take his or her religion more seriously and begin slaughtering infidels.

          gravenimage, I have the greatest respect for your knowledge of Islam (and history, etc.), and I agree with most of the views you’ve presented on Jihad Watch over the years. Your comments on JW are important contributions to the site. And, in my opinion, the value of your commentary is enhanced by the fact that it comes from a counter-jihadi of the progressive/left-leaning persuasion, and therefore should appeal to readers on the political left, which is the demographic most in need of education on the nature of Islam and the threat it poses.

          But I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this particular issue. I remain unconvinced that an amendment of this type would somehow weaken the Constitution. It would not be a capitulation to Islam, in which Muslims force us to give up some of our rights or freedoms. The passage and enforcement of that amendment would deliver a knock-out blow to Islam & Muslims in the U.S., forever ending the threat they pose to us and our society.

        • Savvy Kafir, I have also said that we should start deporting Muslims; I don’t think that this weakens the Constitution or the First Amendment.

          And thank you for your kind words.

          I think we ultimately have the same goals; we just differ somewhat on the best way to achieve them.

Discover more from

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Skip to content