There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. —Soren Kierkegaard. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
“Through your hands comes the relief for the believers and the killing of the infidels by your sword.”
While the NYPD is being attacked with balls of ice…..
He was at the Al-Khoei Islamic Center in Queens.
Mamdani: Last Ramadan, I was with many of you here at the procession on the martydom anniversary of Imam Ali. It is a privilege to be here with you once again. I stand before you as the first Muslim mayor in our city’s history and this year as the first Jum’ah [Friday prayer] that I have attended in that new position and to do so together. It is a reminder that in this month of Ramadan, as we find moments of reflection of recommitment moments of community, that we always do so together, and it’s together that I am thankful to be here today and I’m thankful to have the opportunity to lead our city (MEMRI).
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani attended Friday prayers at the Al-Khoei Islamic Center in Queens, NY, on the first Friday of Ramadan, February 20, 2026. Iman Dakmak-Rakka, principal of the Al-Iman School, affiliated with the Al-Khoei Center, and a representative of the Al-Khoei Foundation, thanked Mamdani for his work on behalf of “all of humanity and all the residents of New York.” During the following prayer service, the imam prayed that Allah make them among those who await the Mahdi and are martyred before him, adding that through the hands of the Mahdi “comes the relief for the believers and the killing of the infidels by your sword.”
The Al-Khoei Foundation has maintained financial ties with the Alavi Foundation, which U.S. federal courts and prosecutors have identified as a front for the Government of Iran and its state-owned Bank Melli. The Al-Khoei Foundation has publicly defended the Alavi Foundation against these accusations. In November 2023, Imam Fadhel Al-Sahlani, an official representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani in North America, said that Hamas has made a “big difference” not only in the Arab Muslim world, but for the whole world.
Zohran Mamdani: “Last Ramadan, I was with many of you here at the procession of the martyrdom anniversary of Imam Ali. It is a privilege to be here with you once again.
[…]
“I stand before you as the first Muslim mayor in our city’s history, and this year is the first Friday prayer that I have attended in that new position.”
“And to do so together – it is a reminder that in this month of Ramadan, as we find moments of reflection, of recommitment, moments of community, that we always do so together. And it is together that I am thankful to be here today, and I am thankful to have the opportunity to lead our city. Salaam Alaikum.”
[…]
Iman Dakmak-Rakka: “You work not just for Muslims, you work for all of humanity and all of the residents of New York City. So we thank you very much for this, and we pray daily for your success in this journey, inshallah. Thank you.”
among those who await you [the Mahdi], follow you, and support you against your enemies, and among those who are martyred before you, among the ranks of your loyal ones.
[…]
“Through your hands comes the relief for the believers and the killing of the infidels by your sword.”
The Al Khoei Islamic Center is linked to the Alavi Foundation who the DOJ has cited an Iranian Front. More from MEMRI: Imam Prays for the Mahdi to kill the infidels by his sword (MEMRI).
NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani Attends Friday Prayers at Al Khoei Islamic Center in Queens – Linked to Alavi Foundation Cited by the DOJ as an Iranian Front; Imam Prays for the Mahdi to Kill the Infidels by His Sword pic.twitter.com/xrRsIpalcH
The status of women in Islam is a subject enshrouded in controversy. According to many Muslims, Muhammad was a champion of women’s rights, bestowing upon the women in his community privileges and rights that they did not have previously. The notion that women in pre-Islamic Arabia had no rights, however, is demonstrably untrue. Former Muslim Nabeel Qureshi lists some of the rights that women had in pre-Islamic Arabia, which included ease of divorce, the ability to marry multiple men, and become overlords. Women were even able to propose for marriage, as in fact was the case with respect to Khadija’s marriage to Muhammad.
To outsiders, the hijab is often viewed as a symbol of oppression. Since April 2011, wearing of head coverings (including hijabs) in public places has even been outlawed in France. Muslims, by contrast, point out that the tradition of veiling and seclusion was present in pre-Islamic Arabia, and also Syria and Iran, since long prior to Muhammad, and was even seen as an emblem of social status, only affordable by women who didn’t need to work out in the fields.
The first alleged revelation concerning veiling occurred in 627 A.D. This is found in Surah Al-Ahzab (33) 53:
Believers, do not enter the Prophet’s house … unless asked. And if you are invited … do not linger. And when you ask something from the Prophet’s wives, do so from behind a hijab. This will assure the purity of your hearts as well as theirs.
Surprisingly, this verse does not prescribe the veil for all women but only Muhammad’s wives. Reza Aslan, in his book No God But God, points out that the term, darabat al-hijab, used for putting on the veil, was used interchangeably with “becoming Muhammad’s wife” and suggests that the hijab was adopted by other Muslim women only after the death of Muhammad — possibly as a means of emulating Muhammad’s wives — and that the veil didn’t become compulsory or even generally adopted until much later. Reza’s interpretation, however, is disputed by other scholars.
The Hijab should not be regarded as the primary issue in the debate concerning the status of women in Islam. There are many far more concerning issues that need to be addressed.
In this article, I want to draw attention to some of these issues relating to Muhammad’s view of women.
Women Are Mentally Deficient?
According to the Qur’an, the testimony of one man is as good as the testimony of two women. We read in Surah Al-Baqara (2) 282 in the context of writing receipts for paid debt:
“Have two witnesses from among your men, and if two men are not there, then one man and two women from those witnesses whom you like, so that if one of the two women errs, the other women may remind her.”
Why is the testimony of a woman only worth half that of a man? Muhammad himself informs us in Sahih al-Bukhari (Volume 3, Book 48, no. 826):
“Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, ‘Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?’ The women said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.”
This is further stated in volume 1, book 6, no. 301, of Sahih al-Bukhari. Muhammad is reported to have said,
“O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses? The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.”
Muhammad, thus, does not seem to take a particularly high view of the intellect of women.
The Majority of Hell’s Inhabitants Are Women?
In Sahih Al-Bukhari volume 1, book 2, number 28 Muhammad again asserts that he saw that “the majority of [Hell’s] dwellers were women who were ungrateful.” After being asked whether this ungratefulness was directed towards Allah, Muhammad answered that “They are ungrateful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors and the charitable good (charitable deeds) done to them.” In Sahih Muslim book 36 (no. 6600), Muhammad is reported to have said “Amongst the inmates of Paradise the women would form a minority.”
What if, however, the Muslim women start being grateful to their husbands? What awaits them in Paradise? Well, according to Sahih Al-Bukhari, they get to stand in corners of a pavillion in paradise awaiting men to come and have sex with them. We read in volume 6, book 60, no. 402,
“Narrated Abdullah bin Qais: Allah’s Apostle said, “In Paradise, there is a pavillion made of a single hollow pearl sixty miles wide. In each corner of which there are wives who will not see those in the other corners; and the believers will visit and enjoy them…”
Beating Your Wife Into Subservience
According to the Qur’an, Surah An-Nisa (4) 34,
“Men are caretakers of women, since Allah has made some of them excel the others, and because of the wealth they have spent. So, the righteous women are obedient, (and) guard (the property and honor of their husbands) in (their) absence with the protection given by Allah. As for women of whom you fear rebellion, convince them, and leave them apart in beds, and beat them. Then, if they obey you, do not seek a way against them. Surely, Allah is the Highest, the Greatest.”
Women are here viewed as the property of their male caretakers, and men are permitted to beat their wives in cases where they “fear rebellion”. Muhammad’s favorite wife, Aisha (to whom he was betrothed to be married when she was six and he fifty-one, a marriage that was consummated when she turned nine and before she had reached the age of puberty), makes an observation that is recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari volume 7, book 72, no. 715:
Narrated Ikrima: Rita’a divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complaining to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes.”
Even during the lifetime of Muhammad, Aisha observed that nobody suffered so much as the believing, i.e., Muslim, women — in other words, Muslim women were being treated worse than pagan women. Rather than rebuke the man for beating his wife until her skin turned green, as one might expect of the champion of woman’s rights that Muhammad is supposed to have been, Muhammad instead took the side of the husband and rebuked the woman.
Aisha’s father, Abu Bakr, a close companion of Muhammad and the first of the four rightly-guided caliphs, also seems to have abused Aisha. According to Sahih al-Bukhari volume 8, book 82, no. 828.
Narrated Aisha: Abu Bakr came towards me and struck me violently with his fist and said, “You have detained the people because of your necklace.” But I remained motionless as if I was dead lest I should awake Allah’s Apostle although that hit was very painful.”
Muhammad is even reported to have said (according to Sunan Abu Dawud book 11 no. 2142), “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.”
The Qur’an Permits Rape Of Female Captives
According to Surah An-Nisa (4) 24, “Also prohibited are the women already bound in marriage, except the bondwomen you come to own.”
Surah Al-Mumenoon (23) 1-6 says the same thing:
“Success is really attained by the believers who concentrate their attention in humbleness when offering Salah (prayers) and who keep themselves away from vain things, and who are performers of Zakah and who guard their private parts except from their wives or from those (bondwomen who are) owned by their hands, as they are not to be blamed.”
A similar instruction is given in Surah Al-Maarij (70) 30. What is the historical context of these verses? We need only go to the Hadith sources to find out. We read in Sunan Abu Dawud 2150,
“The Apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Autas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: ‘And all married women are forbidden unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.’ That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.”
Another report is given by Sahih Muslim book 8, no. 3432,
“Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain, Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) sent an army in Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the companions of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: “And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.”
In Sahih Muslim book 8, no. 3371, we read,
“Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah be pleased with him): O Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al- ‘azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception, also known as coitus interruptus). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.”
Sahih al-Bukhari volume 5,book 59, no. 459, says,
“Narrated ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl. Abu Said said, “We went out with Allah’s Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, “How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Apostle who is present among us?” We asked (him) about it and he said, “It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.”
Muslims sometimes try to argue that this would have taken place only after marriage to these captive women. But this is clearly not the case, since the men wanted to fetch a ransom price for them afterwards.
Prostitution
Muhammad permitted temporary marriage contracts whereby one could contract with a woman for a temporary marriage. According to Surah An-Nisa (4) 24, “…to those of them whose company you have enjoyed, give their dues (dower) as obligated. There is no sin on you in what you mutually agree upon after the (initial) agreement.”
We also read in Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 139,
Narrated Abdullah: We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we said to the Prophet “Shall we castrate ourselves?” But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman temporarily by giving her even a garment and then he recited “O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you.”
Here, Muhammad gives permission to Muslims to offer a woman clothing in exchange for access to her body. A further reference to this practice is given in Sahih Muslim, book 8, number 3252:
“Sabra Juhanni reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) permitted temporary marriage for us. So I and another person went out and saw a woman of Bana Amir, who was like a young long-necked she-camel. We presented ourselves to her (for contracting temporary marriage), whereupon she said: What dower would you give me? I said: My cloak. And my companion also said: My cloak. And the cloak of my companion was superior to my clock, but I was younger than he. So when she looked at the cloak of my companion she liked it, and when she cast a glance at me I looked more attractive to her. She then said: Well, you and your cloak are sufficient for me. I remained with her for three nights, and then Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who has any such woman with whom he has contracted temporary marriage, he should let her off.”
Conclusion
The items raised above represent just a few of the many issues that could be raised in relation to Muhammad’s view of women. The bottom line is that the assertion that Muhammad was a champion of women’s rights is historically untenable. By contrast, the Bible has a very progressive view of women, certainly for its day. According to Paul, although the sexes may have different roles in marriage and ecclesiology, men and women are ultimately equal in the sight of God, all being one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28). Jesus Himself forgave a woman caught in the act of adultery and saved her from being stoned to death (John 8:1-11), spoke to a Samaritan woman about the way of salvation (John 4:1-42), allowed his feet to be anointed by Mary Magdalene, and tasks John the Apostle with looking after his mother Mary (John 19:26-27). Jesus’ first post-resurrection appearances are even to women. Many women are also key players in the book of Acts, as well as the Old Testament — for example, the story of Esther is about a woman who saves her people, the Hebrews, from being exterminated. When one examines and compares the Qur’an and the Bible, the stark contrast in view of women becomes very apparent.
Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)
Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.
On the Islamic war against women and the West’s poor response:
One of the most troubling and worrying situations that we find in the West is the almost complete silence – especially by liberal women and feminists – as to how Islam treats women. Islam is NOT pro-women. We have 1400 years of history to make this crystal clear. Yet so many in the West choose to remain totally blind to this and totally deceived about it.
I have written often on this topic – here are just a few earlier pieces:
Seven books (of many) that can be mentioned here are the following:
Chesler, Phyllis, An American Bride in Kabul: A Memoir. St. Martin’s Press, 2013.
Chesler, Phyllis, The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom. Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. (about feminism’s lack of response to militant Islam)
Hirsi Ali, Ayaan, The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam. Atria Books, 2008.
Hirsi Ali, Ayaan, Prey: Immigration, Islam, and the Erosion of Women’s Rights. Harper, 2021.
Robinson, Stuart, The Hidden Half: Women and Islam. CHI Books, 2017.
Spencer, Robert, Holy Hell: Islam’s Abuse of Women and the Infidels Who Enable It. Bombardier Books, 2025.
Sultan, Wafa, A God Who Hates: The Courageous Woman Who Inflamed the Muslim World Speaks Out Against the Evils of Islam. St Martin’s Press, 2009.
So here I will briefly mention the other three. Many of you know the story of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The Somali-born woman was once a Muslim, then moved to Europe and became an atheist, but now she has converted to Christianity. Her story is told in Infidel: My Life (2007), and Nomad: From Islam to America (2010).
In The Caged Virgin she says this in the Preface:
About twelve years ago, at age twenty-two, I arrived in Western Europe, on the run from an arranged marriage. I soon learned that God and His truth had been humanized here. For Muslims life on earth is merely a transitory stage before the hereafter; but here people are also allowed to invest in their lives as mortals. What is more, hell seems no longer to exist, and God is a god of love rather than a cruel ruler who metes out punishments. I began to take a more critical look at my faith and discovered three important elements of Islam that had not particularly struck me before.
The first of these is that a Muslim’s relationship with his God is one of fear. A Muslim’s conception of God is absolute. Our God demands total submission. He rewards you if you follow His rules meticulously. He punishes you cruelly if you break His rules, both on earth, with illness and natural disasters, and in the hereafter, with hellfire.
The second element is that Islam knows only one moral source: the Prophet Muhammad. Muhammad is infallible. You would almost believe he is himself a god, but the Koran says explicitly that Muhammad is a human being; he is a supreme human being, though, the most perfect human being. We must live our lives according to his example. What is written in the Koran is what God said as it was heard by Muhammad. The thousands of hadiths-accounts of what Muhammad said and did, and the advice he gave, which survives in weighty books—tell us exactly how a Muslim was supposed to live in the seventh century. Devout Muslims consult these works daily to answer questions about life in the twenty-first century.
The third element is that Islam is strongly dominated by a sexual morality derived from tribal Arab values dating from the time the Prophet received his instructions from Allah, a culture in which women were the property of their fathers, brothers, uncles, grandfathers, or guardians. The essence of a woman is reduced to her hymen. Her veil functions as a constant reminder to the outside world of this stifling morality that makes Muslim men the owners of women and obliges them to prevent their mothers, sisters, aunts, sisters-in-law, cousins, nieces, and wives from having sexual contact. And we are not just talking about cohabitation. It is an offense if a woman glances in the direction of a man, brushes past his arm, or shakes his hand. A man’s reputation and honor depend entirely on the respectable, obedient behavior of the female members of his family.
These three elements explain largely why Muslim nations are lagging behind the West and, more recently, also lagging behind Asia….
She also says this in the Preface:
The adherents to the gospel of multiculturalism refuse to criticize people whom they see as victims. Some Western critics disapprove of United States policies and attitudes but do not criticize the Islamic world, just as, in the first part of the twentieth century, Western socialist apologists did not dare criticize the Soviet labor camps. Along the same lines, some Western intellectuals criticize Israel, but they will not criticize Palestine because Israel belongs to the West, which they consider fair game, but they feel sorry for the Palestinians, and for the Islamic world in general, which is not as powerful as the West. They are critical of the native white majority in Western countries but not of Islamic minorities. Criticism of the Islamic world, of Palestinians, and of Islamic minorities is regarded as Islamophobia and xenophobia. I cannot emphasize enough how wrongheaded this is. Withholding criticism and ignoring differences are racism in its purest form. Yet these cultural experts fail to notice that, through their anxious avoidance of criticizing non-Western countries, they trap the people who represent these cultures in a state of backwardness. The experts may have the best of intentions, but as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Prey: Immigration, Islam, and the Erosion of Women’s Rights by Hirsi Ali, Ayaan (Author)
In Prey, she says this early on:
As a Somali arriving in the Netherlands in 1992, I was shocked to see young women alone on public transport and in bars and restaurants. I had grown up knowing that to step outside the house without covering my head and body, or without a male relative to escort me, would make me a target for harassment and assault. But in Holland, women freely walked the streets at night without men to chaperone them, their hair uncovered, wearing whatever they pleased. (p. 5)
But she also soon found that in many major European cities, some areas are no-go zones for women, with only men freely moving about in public. This of course nicely illustrates the principle that ‘if you import a people, you import their culture’. She shares plenty of detail and evidence about what is happening in Europe:
Young people in Western societies have grown up with the assumption that gender equality is a given. They did not have to fight for basic equality and are often oblivious to its being undermined around them. Even when they are confronted with the erosion of women’s rights in the street, they sometimes apologize for criticizing their attackers. In court, victims of sexual assault appearing on the witness stand have to insist that they are not racists. Almost every woman I interviewed in the course of researching this book felt obliged to begin with a caveat: “I’m not against migrants,” “I’m from the Left,” or “I am not racist.” (p. 228)
She says this in her Conclusion:
The pendulum is swinging back toward misogyny as liberal Europe changes to accommodate migrant cultures. Adaptation is happening, but it’s happening the other way around. Progress is not only not inevitable; in this case, it is reversing.
In writing this book, I have come to the conclusion that we need a new women’s movement, one that views the world not in terms of multiculturalism and intersectionality but in universal terms and that, in the spirit of John Stuart and Harriet Taylor Mill, is prepared to stand up for the rights of all women. (p. 274)
As to Robert Spencer’s new book Holy Hell, the American expert on Islam primarily looks at the British rape attacks by Muslims. These grooming gangs have so often been ignored and/or under-reported by the authorities and media there.
He begins by noting how the West is undergoing a rape crisis: rape rates in so many European cities have greatly increased in recent years – correlated with the rising number of Muslims coming into Europe. He says this might seem somewhat counterintuitive, since rape rates in Muslim countries are rather low. How do we explain this?
The answer is twofold. One is that many rapes go unreported in Muslim countries because the behavior involved simply isn’t considered a crime. Islamic law, based on words attributed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad himself, forbids a woman to refuse sexual intercourse to her husband under any circumstances. With such a rule in place, how can a rape ever even be said to have occurred? It never could in the context of a marriage; it could only take place when a man forces himself upon a woman who is not his wife.
The second reason is as shocking as it is unmistakable: the Islamic religion forbids the rape of Muslim women, but it does not forbid the rape of non-Muslim women. In fact, the Qur’an specifically allows for this as a legitimate sexual outlet for Muslim men. And such activity doesn’t make its way into crime statistics, as it is not considered to be a crime at all.
In light of these two factors, it’s no surprise whatsoever that rape rates in Muslim countries would be low to nonexistent, but that mass Muslim migration into Europe would account for the continent’s new rape crisis. (xv-xvi)
And he discusses ‘rape as a weapon of war’: “In one sense, Islam is not unique in this. Numerous cultures throughout history, and in our own age, accept rape as a justified weapon of war.” (p. 18) He goes on to give some examples of this and then writes:
Islam is unique even in comparison to the acceptance of rape as a weapon of warfare in other cultures, for it combines all of these motivations. Infidel women are taken as the spoils of war, but the goal is ultimately the expansion of the Islamic community and the diminishment of the infidel community. And so rape of infidel women is also useful as a means to humiliate the defeated infidel force, as well as a means of social control and to aid in the redrawing of ethnic boundaries. On top of all that is the divine sanction given to it all. Rape of infidel women in a jihad war is not just something the commanders permit, as a means to humiliate the infidels. It is a holy act. (p. 19)
After some 250 pages describing the Islamic views on women, and analysing in detail the British grooming gangs, he says this: “[T]he West has a choice. It can continue to allow the proliferation of this ideology that will result in the victimization of more of its women, or it can take action against it.” (p. 276)
And he reminds us that “this is not now and has never been a question of ‘racism’ or ‘Islamophobia’. It’s a question of survival. If a culture allows what happened in Britain to continue, and stigmatizes action against it, that culture is not long for this world, and that’s why Britain’s demise is at hand.” (p. 277)
His final words are these: “This is the choice Europe faces. This is the choice Canada faces. This is the choice the United States faces. Either make it clear that Islam’s abuse of women is intolerable and unacceptable, or acquiesce to it and surrender. Which one will they choose?” (p. 280)
And we can add Australia here as well.
Postscript: She has made my case!
And right on cue, as I was about to publish this piece, the best bit of evidence to back up what I have been saying here just appeared on the social media. It seems another woke, white, Western woman was convinced that there is no Islam problem in Europe.
The Left doesn’t take a break from telling lies just because it’s the holiday season. As intercessors, we must always be on guard and ready to expose deception wherever and whenever it arises.
The first lie told by the Left this week involves a student at the University of Oklahoma who was required to write a 650-word essay addressing societal expectations of gender. In the essay, student Samantha Fulnecky “argued that traditional gender roles should not be considered stereotypes.” Citing the Bible, she stated that eliminating gender in society would be “detrimental” because it would cause people to drift “farther from God’s original plan for humans.” She further explained that, “God made male and female and made us differently from each other on purpose and for a purpose. God was very intentional with what He makes, and I believe trying to change that would only do more harm…Society pushing the lie that there are multiple genders and everyone should be whatever they want to be is demonic and severely harms American youth.”
Transgender Teacher Penalizes Student
Transgender graduate instructor Mel Curth, who goes by she/they, was offended by the essay. Consequently, the student was given a zero on the assignment. Curth stressed that Fulnecky relied on “personal ideology” and “failed to use empirical evidence.” The professor wrote on the online grading platform, “To call an entire group of people ‘demonic’ is highly offensive, especially a minoritized population.”
Fulnecky maintains that she followed the essay guidelines and that she was penalized for her religious views. She appealed the grade, citing religious discrimination. Quickly, her plight gained nationwide attention.
Governor of Oklahoma Defends Religious Freedom
Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt responded to the incident on X. “The 1st Amendment is foundational to our freedom and inseparable from a well-rounded education. The situation at OU is deeply concerning. I’m calling on the OU regents to review the results of the investigation and ensure other students aren’t unfairly penalized for their beliefs.”
In the end, the college decided in favor of Fulnecky by agreeing to discard the failing grade. Fulnecky believes this is a clear win for religious freedom.
University of Oklahoma officials report that the “graduate student instructor has been placed on administrative leave pending the finalization” of the investigation.
Turning Point USA shared the details of what happened to Fulnecky on X, with the post garnering over 38 million views. “We at Turning Point OU stand with Samantha … Clearly this professor lacks the intellectual maturity to set her own bias aside and take grading seriously. Professors like this are the very reason conservatives can’t voice their beliefs in the classroom.”
Leftist instructors like Mel Curth want the world to believe that gender is fluid and society must go along with this delusion. But the truth is that if more students push back, the harder it will be for irrational lies to take root. Let’s pray that college students across America boldly proclaim their faith, especially in classrooms where professors deliberately push gender ideology.
Governor Walz Fails to Protect Taxpayers
The second lie told by the Left this week revolves around Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and the massive fraud scheme involving Somali immigrants who stole more than one billion dollars from taxpayers, funneling it to Al-Shabaab terrorists. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer reported that a thorough investigation into Governor Walz’s “failure to safeguard taxpayer dollars” is in progress.
“Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was warned about massive fraud in a pandemic food-aid program for children, yet he failed to act. Instead, whistleblowers who raised concerns faced retaliation,” Comer stressed. “Because of Governor Walz’s negligence, criminals — including Somali terrorists — stole nearly $1 billion from the program while children suffered.”
Tax Money Funding Terrorists
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent is also leading an investigation into the fraud scheme. “At my direction, @USTreasury is investigating allegations that under the feckless mismanagement of the Biden Administration and Governor Tim Walz, hardworking Minnesotans’ tax dollars may have been diverted to the terrorist organization Al-Shabaab. Thanks to the leadership of @POTUS @realDonaldTrump, we are acting fast to ensure Americans’ taxes are not funding acts of global terror. We will share our findings as our investigation continues.”
Though Walz denies wrongdoing and refuses to call out Somali scammers, a whistleblower alleges that he is “100% responsible” for the fraud. An X post attributed to the Minnesota Staff Fraud Reporting Commentary reveals, “We let Tim Walz know of fraud early on, hoping for a partnership in stopping fraud but no, we got the opposite response. Tim Walz systematically retaliated against whistleblowers using monitoring, threats, repression, and did his best to discredit fraud reports. Instead of partnership, we got the full weight of retaliation.”
The White House website posted an article on December 1, 2025, titled Yes, There’s Something Wrong with Walz–and it Cost Taxpayers $1 Billion. An excerpt from the article reads, “The massive scandal unfolded on Walz’s watch — and he did absolutely nothing about it.All enforcement has been at the federal — not state — level. In fact, the state’s cowardly Democrat officials were ‘reluctant’ to act — ‘tolerating, if not tacitly allowing, the fraud,’ and ignoring whistleblowers — to avoid ‘political backlash among the Somali community’ and accusations of racism.”
Tim Walz and his liberal supporters want to sweep this scandal under the rug, but citizens are fed up with their hard-earned tax dollars being used to fund people who are working to undermine national security and the American way of life. Let’s pray that those who are responsible are held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
Exposing Islam
The third lie told by the Left this week has to do with Islam and Sharia law. While Leftists insist that neither poses a threat to American civilization, this lie is being exposed by lawmakers like Texas Representative Keith Self (R).
In a fiery speech from the House floor, this congressman left no boxes unchecked when it came to highlighting the “existential threat of Sharia in America.” One need only read his speech to see how he clearly presents the facts about Islam.
Below are excerpts from Rep. Self’s informative speech.
“Islam is a culture with a Petina of religion. Sharia is the law of Islam. Sharia is dangerous. Western values form the basis for the Founding of America, namely that rights come from our Creator; ours is a Christian-based culture. Sharia, on the other hand, is a culture of violence and domination, totally anathema to the concept of individual freedom.
The United States Constitution and Sharia are fundamentally at odds with one another. The Constitution begins with ‘We the People,’ Sharia states, ‘Allah has said.’ Followers of Sharia believe Muhammad received a divine legal code that stands supreme over all man-made laws.
While Western civilization has evolved, Islam has not. Islam is stuck in the 8th century, and if they succeed at imposing their beliefs on us, we will be dragged back into the ‘Dark Ages.’
The contrasts are stark when comparing Sharia to the strides made by the United States in 250 years. The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolished slavery, but there has never been an abolition movement in Islam. The Quran and hadith even contain rules for slaves and the slave trade.
Sharia prescribes inhumane punishments viewed as normative. Stoning to death for adultery is common in some Islamic nations today, as are public beatings of women, the amputation of the hand of a thief, and execution of Christians and Jews in accordance with the Quran. Several hardline clerics have even issued fatwas calling for the assassination of President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu.
The Declaration of Independence states, ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL MEN are created equal.’ Not so in Islam. According to Sharia, the testimony of a non-Muslim is not valid against a Muslim in a court of law. A woman’s testimony is equal to one-half that of a man. Non-Muslims living in majority Islamic societies are second-class citizens with few rights and little protection under the law…
Freedom of religion is in our 1st Amendment, but ‘Freedom of religion’ in Sharia means one is permitted to embrace Islam, but one is never free to leave Islam. Abandoning Sharia is an apostasy punishable by death.
Freedom of speech in America extends to expression not only with verbal communication, but in art, writing, the media, and action. Certain forms of expression are forbidden by Sharia. Non-Muslims and moderate Muslims who openly criticize Islam, Muhammad, or the Quran face severe punishment…
America was founded on a basic concept of freedom of the individual, self-governing under the rule of law. John Adams said, ‘Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.’ We are witnessing the reality of Adams’ wisdom in the clash of cultures as outsiders stream into our country without assimilating. A prominent Muslim attorney argued in a U.S. court, ‘Islam is Sharia; Sharia is Islam. The two cannot be separated…’
In the streets of New York City, a Muslim Imam recently proclaimed, ‘We will not stop until Islam enters every home.’ There is no denying Islam’s intent to dominate Western civilization. Their stated objective is to destroy us from within…
This is a time for choosing. Either we defeat the Sharia advances in America, or the government of the people, by the people, for the people may indeed perish from the earth.”
The truth is that Islam has already infiltrated states like Texas, Minnesota, New York, California, and Illinois. This trend will continue unless Americans stand up against the agenda. We must pray for lawmakers and citizens to halt Islam’s progression. May the gospel of Jesus Christ penetrate the hearts and minds of our nation’s citizens.
Lord Jesus, the lies are numerous and overwhelming, but Your truth is all we need to overcome them. Help us be bold and courageous as we expose deception.
These are just a few of the lies the Left told this Week. How are you praying?
Angela Rodriguez is an author, blogger, and former teacher who studies the signs of the times, as well as the historical and biblical connections between Israel and the United States. You can visit her blogs at 67owls.com and 100trumpets.com.She is also the author of Psalm 91: Under the Wings of Jesus and Hallelujah’s Great Ride. Photo Credit: Danny Butlin-Policarpo on Unsplash.
What we must know about the Islamic invasion of the West:
With mass migration, porous borders, and rampant multiculturalism in full swing in most Western nations, one needs to ask hard questions about how all this will pan out – especially in terms of millions of Muslims coming in and not really integrating but seeking to set up separate and unequal subcultures.
Indeed, we already know how this is panning out, be it with the UK Muslim grooming gangs, or Muslims being elected in major cities, including New York. Many important books have been written on this. I just looked through my bookcase of over 200 volumes on Islam, and grabbed a handful of books on this topic.
Here I simply want to alert you to these six important volumes and quote a bit from each. And note that I have already written full or partial reviews of each of these books.
Bawer, Bruce, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within. Doubleday, 2006.
So it stood. Western Europe was a runaway train, racing at an ever-increasing speed toward a harrowing precipice. Its engineer was irrationally oblivious, refusing to acknowledge that anything was wrong; of its passengers, long accustomed to passivity, only some were aware of the problem, and among them, only a handful were up out of their seats, shouting, attempting to alert others to their impending doom. Would the passengers listen, and act wisely, in time to avert catastrophe? Would they take over the controls only to send the cars hurtling down another track, toward a different disaster? Or would they do nothing, and race to their calamitous end with docile fatalism?…
[If] Islamists are out to destroy America, they’re equally determined to subdue and colonize Europe. For them, it’s no mere historical fact that most of Iberia and large swaths of Eastern Europe were once integral parts of the Islamic empire. Now, nearly the whole of Western Europe is practically within their grasp. Western Europeans, having already abandoned their religion and scorned their national identities, have little that matters to rally around. The backbone of America is its people’s determination to honor and build upon their heritage of freedom; by contrast, Western Europeans—whose ‘68-er elites have sought to make them feel ashamed of their heritage, contemptuous of their freedom, and willing and eager to settle for any kind of “peace” at any cost—have been encouraged, and permitted, to take pride only in the supreme achievements of their social-democratic systems: multiculturalism, the welfare state, and the “European project.” It’s as if Europe, after all the horrors it inflicted on itself in the twentieth century in the name of God and country and Volk, were determined to yank up all its roots, pull down all its flags, and base its sense of identity on safely superficial things. Yet as current events are proving, a civilization with so prosaic a self-understanding is a house of cards, easily toppled by a foreign people possessed of a fierce, all-subsuming sense of who they are and what they believe. (pp. 230-231)
Caldwell, Christopher, Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam and the West. Doubleday, 2009.
For decades, European authorities pursued utility for themselves over utility of their society. Indeed, even to raise the question of whether immigration will promote or endanger European survival is considered vulgar and un-European at best, extremist at worst. Immigrant communities have felt under no such constraint.
Europe’s basic problem with Islam, and with immigration more generally, is that the strongest communities in Europe are, culturally speaking, not European communities at all. This problem exists in all European countries, despite a broad variety of measures taken to solve it—multiculturalism in Holland, lafcite in France, benign neglect in Britain, constitutional punctiliousness in Germany. Clearly Europe’s problem is with Islam and with immigration, and not with specific misapplications of specific means set up to manage them. Islam is a magnificent religion that has also been, at times over the centuries, a glorious and generous culture. But, all cant to the contrary, it is in no sense Europe’s religion and it is in no sense Europe’s culture.
It is certain that Europe will emerge changed from its confrontation with Islam. It is far less certain that Islam will prove assimilable. Europe finds itself in a contest with Islam for the allegiance of its newcomers. For now, Islam is the stronger party in that contest, in an obvious demographic way and in a less obvious philosophical way. In such circumstances, words like “majority” and “minority” mean little. When an insecure, malleable, relativistic culture meets a culture that is anchored, confident, and strengthened by common doctrines, it is generally the former that changes to suit the latter. (pp. 348-349)
Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance by Geller, Pamela (Author)
Geller, Pamela, Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance. WND Books, 2011.
Make no mistake. We are at war. Our mortal enemy has made no secret of its goal and stated aim: “eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house,” and installing a universal caliphate. Pretending that fourteen-hundred years of Islamic imperialism and expansionism didn’t happen doesn’t change reality either.
Ayn Rand said that you can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality. If you refuse to fight, you forfeit. If you forfeit, you lose. And I mean, lose everything. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
Saul Alinsky had Rules for Radicals. I’m giving you “Rules for Infidels.” Consider this your handbook to win the war. Keep it with you at all times. There is more than one way to be armed and dangerous….
Stop Islamization of America is dedicated to stopping that stealth jihad, exposing the Islamic supremacists, and preserving the freedom of speech, the freedom of conscience, and the equality of rights of all people before the law. We are not against Islam or Muslims as such, but against the political and supremacist character of Islam as enunciated by Muhammad, the Muslim prophet who declared, “Islam must dominate, and not be dominated.” Separation of mosque and state is the mandate, and should be the rallying cry for all Americans. In stark contrast to the Islamic drive to control all facets of our society through imposition of Sharia, the separation of religion and state is the mandate of our constitutional law, and the continued primacy of our law should be the rallying cry, the continued legal standard, for all Americans.
Muslims are working in the United States now to make sure that Islam dominates by destroying our Constitutional freedoms. How do I know that? Because they’ve told us. (i, iii-iv)
Murray, Douglas, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam. Bloomsbury Continuum, 2017.
Europeans are left in the position of not believing sufficiently in their own story and being distrustful of their past whilst knowing that there are other stories moving in that they do not want. Everywhere a feeling is growing of all options being closed off….
Day by day the continent of Europe is not only changing but is losing any possibility of a soft landing in response to such change. An entire political class have failed to appreciate that many of us who live in Europe love the Europe that was ours. We do not want our politicians, through weakness, self-hatred, malice, tiredness, or abandonment to change our home into an utterly different place. And while Europeans may be almost endlessly compassionate, we may not be boundlessly so. The public may want many contradictory things, but they will not forgive politicians if—whether by accident or design—they change our continent completely. If they do so change it then many of us will regret this quietly. Others will regret it less quietly. Prisoners of the past and of the present, for Europeans there seem finally to be no decent answers to the future. Which is how the fatal blow will finally land. (pp. 319-320)
Phillips, Melanie, Londonistan: How Britain is Creating a Terror State Within. Encounter Books, 2006.
Britain is the global leader of English-speaking culture. It was Britain that first developed” the Western ideas of the rule of law, democracy and liberal ideals, and exported them to other countries. Now Britain is leading the rout of those values, allowing its culture to become vulnerable to the predations of militant Islam. If British society goes down under this twin assault, the impact will be incalculable – not just for the military defence of the West against radical Islamism, but for the very continuation of Western civilization itself.
The West is under threat from an enemy that has shrewdly observed the decadence and disarray in Europe, where Western civilization first began. And the greatest of all is in Britain, the very cradle of Western liberty and democracy, but whose cultural confusion is now plain for all to see in Londonistan. The Islamists chose well. Britain is not what it once was. Whether it will finally pull itself together and stop sleepwalking into cultural oblivion is a question on which the future of the West may now depend. (pp. 284-285)
Solomon, Sam and E Al Maqdisi, Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration. ANM, 2009.
The primary goal of the Hijra (Islamic immigration) is the establishment of an Islamic state. This is achieved through da’wa. Da’wa means ‘to call’, and in Islamic terms it means ‘a call to Islam’ and so it is a missionary call to embrace Islam. It is unlike a personal conversion call, though at the outset it may look like that. Da’wa is both religious and political as there is no separation between sacred and secular, between state and religion in Islam. The da’wa is to spread the message of Islam and the establishment of an Islamic state. The spreading of Islam is not simply a missionary activity like that of a church but it is the establishment of a community that would rise up as the soldiers of Allah to establish an Islamic State. The Islamic confession and its declaration ultimately state that the suzerainty of this world and all its governments belong to Allah and his messenger Muhammad. Therefore, it is Allah and his apostle who are the only rightful legislators. All other legislations are manmade, and as such they are to be disregarded as kufr, or unbelief and apostasy. Because of this, the primary goal of the Islamic migration or Hijra is considered to be, by Muslim scholars from a religious and jurisprudence point of view as the vanguard, a preamble and prelude to jihad, or the establishment of an Islamic State. (p. 33)
In sum, it should be pointed out that not every Muslim that migrates to the West has in mind this obligation to help see established an Islamic state. But whether or not they are aware of this obligation and/or intend to see it carried out, that is the clear teaching of official Islamic doctrine and jurisprudence for over 1400 years now.
So what we see happening all throughout the West should not be surprising. We have been warned about this – and for one and a half millennia now.
The US city of Paterson, New Jersey, has passed an ordinance to allow the adhan, the Muslim call to prayer, to be broadcast over loudspeakers.
We watched it happen over the past decade in England, and are now watching it unfold here in the United States. The Islamification of America is something that should be triggering alarm bells off, and sadly, it’s ignored by all administrations on the Left and the Right. Back at the start of the Pandemic, the town of Paterson, New Jersey, just a few miles away from where I was born and raised, approved the daily broadcast of the Adhan five times a day, and starting at 6:00 AM. Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee, and that’s the memo.
“Now when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber toward Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime.” Daniel 6:10 (KJB)
The Adhan, or the Muslim call to prayer, is a public declaration that the land is being claimed for Allah and his prophet Mohammed. Starting at 6:00 AM, it blares from loudspeakers 5 times each day, letting the people know that Islam is in control. In addition to Paterson in New Jersey, Minneapolis, Manhattan, Hamtramck, Cedar-Riverside and Dearborn are also places where the Adhan has been passed into law. Islam is not a religion, it’s a governmental system – Sharia – that is brought in under the guise of exercising their religious freedom. It is too late to save England, but America still have the chance. But you won’t see any crackdown on this with Trump in the White House, he has far too many Muslim backers that he’s beholden to, to do anything about the Adhan, Sharia or anything else. Encroaching Sharia is ten times worse than illegal Mexicans coming here to pick lettuce.
2020: US city grants mosques approval to broadcast call to prayer over loudspeakers
FROM MIDDLE EAST EYE: Under the new measure, which still has to go through two public hearings before being implemented, the adhan would be exempt from the city’s noise control ordinance and allowed to be broadcast outside every day between 6am and 10pm.
The resolution was approved by council members on Tuesday by a vote of 7-0, with two members abstaining.
“We applaud Paterson officials for taking this admirable step toward inclusion, and encourage them to pass the proposed ordinance,” said Salaedin Maksut, executive director of the New Jersey chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
“Their open-mindedness to such laws is a concrete demonstration of respect and mutual understanding between the residents of our rich and diverse communities.” READ MORE
The largest mosque in North America is being built at 700 Beech Daly in Dearborn Heights, MI. But don't worry, Islam is a religion of peace and not at all interested in subjugating the people of the lands they conquer in order to bring in Sharia Law. pic.twitter.com/Qyo3bLwYOj
FORGET NONE OF HIS BENEFITS volume 24, number 35, August 28, 2025.
No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of their descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord, (Deuteronomy 23:3). There are currently 3753 Muslim mosques in the United States, with the heaviest concentration of them in Brooklyn and the Bronx.[1]
— An increasing number of America’s public schools are commemorating Muslim holidays, serving Halal food, and holding Islamic prayers towards Mecca. In 2014, Rocky Mountain High School in Fort Collins, Colorado became the first American high school to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in Arabic, replacing “One nation under God,” with “One nation under Allah.”
— Bill Clinton was the first US president to hold a White House Eid al-Fitr dinner at the end of Ramadan, the Muslim month-long, dawn-to-dusk fast. Eid al-Fitr includes six Takbirs, the raising of hands and shouting, “Allahu Akbar!” to declare that Allah is “greater” (than the God of Christianity and the idols of other religions). Every US president since Clinton, including George W. Bush, held this blasphemous dinner for a total of 20 years (1996 to 2016) until Donald Trump scrapped it in 2017.
— In 2000, the Republican National Convention became the first US presidential convention to open with a Muslim prayer to Allah.
— To attract and manage Muslim wealth, an increasing number of American financial institutions quietly began taking steps to become Sharia-compliant. This includes donating a percentage of their annual profits to Islamic groups that are designated by their Sharia-compliance advisors, many of whom belong to the Muslim Brotherhood and funnel funds to Jihadi groups (the donations must go to one or more of eight recipient categories, one of which is Jihad), including Hamas and Hezbollah.
– In 2021, President Joe Biden nominated and the U.S. Senate confirmed Zahid Quraishi as the first Muslim U.S. District Judge, for the District of New Jersey.[2]
What is Sharia Law?[3]
Islam’s Sharia law is cast from the words of Muhammad, called “hadith,” his actions, called “sunnah,” and the Quran, which he dictated. Sharia law prioritizes punishment over rehabilitation and favors corporal and capital punishments over incarceration. Of all legal systems in the world today, Sharia law is the most intrusive and restrictive, especially against women. According to Sharia law
— Theft is punishable by amputation of the hands.
— Criticizing or denying any part of the Quran is punishable by death.
— Criticizing Muhammad or denying that he is a prophet is punishable by death.
— Criticizing or denying Allah is punishable by death.
— A Muslim who becomes a non-Muslim is punishable by death.
— A non-Muslim who leads a Muslim away from Islam is punishable by death.
— A non-Muslim man who marries a Muslim woman is punishable by death.
— Homosexuality is punishable by death but sodomizing boys is fine.
— Girls’ clitoris should be cut (Muhammad’s words, Book 41, Kitab Al-Adab, Hadith 5251).
— Girls can be sodomized and vaginally raped after 8 years of age (see Islam & Sex).
— A woman or girl who has been raped cannot testify in court against her rapist(s).
—Testimonies of 4 male witnesses are required to prove rape of a female (Quran 24:13).
— A woman or girl who alleges rape without producing 4 male witnesses is guilty of adultery.
— A woman or girl found guilty of adultery is punishable by death.
— A male convicted of rape can have his conviction dismissed by marrying his victim.
— Muslim men have sexual rights to any woman/girl not wearing the Hijab.
— A woman can have 1 husband, and a husband can have up to 4 wives; Muhammad had 13 wives.
— A man can beat his wife for insubordination.
— A man can unilaterally divorce his wife; a wife needs her husband’s consent to divorce.
— A divorced wife loses custody of all children over 6 years of age or when they exceed it.
— A woman’s testimony in court, allowed in property cases, carries ½ the weight of a man’s.
— A female heir inherits half of what a male heir inherits.
— A woman cannot speak alone to a man who is not her husband or relative.
— Meat to eat must come from animals that have been sacrificed to Allah – i.e., be “Halal.”
— Muslims should engage in Taqiyya and lie to non-Muslims to advance Islam. Should Muslims be allowed in the United States? What about as tourists or students? Should they be allowed to become naturalized citizens? What criteria should be used to answer these questions?
As always, we must look to the Scriptures for answers. What does the Bible say about immigration? A lot. I counted at least fifty-five times the Hebrew root word “guwr” (to turn aside from the road, alien, sojourner) is used in the Old Testament. God is certainly not opposed to all immigration. He told His people to care for the alien, to not oppress him, because they too had once been aliens in the land of Egypt (Exodus 23:9, Leviticus 19:33,34). However Yahweh also commanded that certain peoples never be allowed into the country of Israel. When Israel was to drive out the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, Yahweh commanded, “Watch yourself that you make no covenant with the inhabitants of the land into which you are going, or it will become a snare in your midst,” (Exodus 34:12). He had particularly strong words against the Ammonites and Moabites, “No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of their descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord,” (Deuteronomy 23:3). At the dedication of the wall reconstruction in Jerusalem, Nehemiah had the leaders of Judah read from the book of Moses, and they found that Ammonites and Moabites were barred from the assembly (Nehemiah 13:1,2). Why such a hardline position against certain aliens? Because any religion beside the true faith of Yahweh was a serious threat to the nation.
Why a serious threat? Because the values and culture of these pagan nations were very much at odds with Yahweh’s vision and values for His covenant people. Yahweh knew that allowing such godless, pagan values to come into Israel would ultimately destroy them. Some things never change. Nothing is new under the sun.
Though our nation long ago jettisoned a national Christian faith, the foundation of our culture and U.S. Constitution are clearly established on Christian values. We still generally hold to a Judeo/Christian world view. Place Sharia Law alongside the Bible and our Constitution. Are they compatible?
The answer should be obvious. So to allow Muslims to visit on a tourist or student visa should be rejected. Why? Their values are totally contrary to our values. Should Muslims be allowed the privilege of naturalized citizenship? Again the answer must be “No.” Never forget the Quran teaches that Muslims are to kill the infidels . “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolators wherever you find them,” (Quran 9:5). Though many Muslims thankfully do not obey the full teaching of Islam, nevertheless we should not take the chance that some might become radicalized.
If former Muslims give evidence of true conversion by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit, then by all means they should be allowed to visit our country or become naturalized citizens. I know we are too far down the road for anyone in state or federal government to heed these words, but the truth still remains. _______________________________
How Many Mosques Are In The United States?” Poidata <poidata.io> August, 2025
Over the last number of weeks we’ve been chatting to lots of young people on the streets around our Church – one of the repeated objections that we have come up against, in discussions with Muslim folk, is that the Scriptures are not inspired, and that the Christians have changed the Tawrat (Torah), the Zabur (Psalms) and Injil (New Testament – chiefly the Gospels).
In a previous post, I wrote that one of the chief Islamic counter-apologetics is denial of the Trinity and Divinity of Jesus – that the Bible has been altered, and its is present form is non-inspired, is the second major sticking-point that Islam raises against the truth. So in this piece, as I learn “on-the-hoof”, I want to make a small, initial, attempt to give you a few ground-clearing points to help you reach-out.
Later Objection
While it would n9t be entirely fair or true to call this a recent argument used by Muslims, as they seek to defend and contend for their own faith, particularly in the Post-Christian West, I do want to state that it appears to be true that it was not until the 10th Century A.D., that this became a prominent sticking point raised against the Evangel.
While it does seem to be true that there are some statements in the Quran that suggested Jews had changed the Torah and Christians had changed the Gospel, as some Islamic scholars are keen to point out, the matter is not so clearcut as might seem at first glance. For example in Surah (Chapter) 2: Ayah (Verse) 79 it says:
But the wrongdoers among them substituted words other than those given to them, so we sent down on the wrongdoers a plague from heaven, because of their wicked behavior – 2:59
Again in 2:75-79 it is stated:
75. Do you hope that they will believe in you, when some of them used to hear the Word of God, and then deliberately distort it, even after understanding it? 76. And when they come across those who believe, they say, “We believe,” but when they come together privately, they say, “Will you inform them of what God has disclosed to you, so that they might dispute with you concerning it before your Lord?” Do you not understand? 77. Do they not know that God knows what they conceal and what they reveal? 78. And among them are uneducated who know the Scripture only through hearsay, and they only speculate. 79. So woe to those who write the Scripture with their own hands, and then say, “This is from God,” that they may exchange it for a little price. Woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for what they earn.
Now, of course, this is an English translation – most Muslims will say you must read the Quran in Arabic to get the real truth: and, for sure, I am no Islamic scholar: therefore, I must be careful not to insist too much on this point. However, as it appears many Muslims recognize themselves, it is not so much that it is asserted that the Jews and Christian changed the Torah and Gospel, or failed to copy them correctly, or transmit them faithfully; rather, it is insisted that they interpreted them wrongly and profited from copies that they made for sale. It seems quite legitimate to suggest, as many have agreed, that the notion that Churches do not have reliable biblical manuscripts was not the key point against which the Quran protests. This becomes more apparent when we consider the Islamic Scholar Ibn Hazm.
His Background
In fact, most trace the fully-developed, erroneously-transmitted, Scripture objection to an Islamic scholar, who lived in Andalucia, called Bin Hazm (his full name was Abu Mohammad Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Said ibn Hazm), also called al-Andalusi al-Zahiri (994-1064). Son of Persian immigrants to Spain, who converted from Christianity to Islam, he was born in Cordoba, into a respected, affluent, academic, family of some import. In those turbulent times, he entered the political fray aged 18. In his 34th year, he set that aside for academic pursuits. In particular, he gave himself to the defence of Islam against the Christianity he encountered.
His Protests
He was quick to accuse Christians, despite their protestations, of what he believed was an illogical, indefensible, inexplicable Trinitarianism, polytheism, and idolatry. As one scholar has written:
Though the Christians believe in the absolute unity of God, at the same time they worship the images portrayed in their church, such as the images of Jesus, the image of Mary, the Cross, the images of Gabriel, the image of Michael and others. To Ibn Hazm it is a form of idolatry prayer (Ibadan al-Authan), but Christians claimed that they are not idol worshippers. At the same time, they even fast (yassumun laha tadayyunan) for the sake of their idols. For him, what they are doing in their prayer is contradicted to the shariah and the teaching of Jesus himself – World Journal of Islamic History & Civilisation 1(4):242-249 (2011)
Just in passing, we might want to note, while lamenting in our hearts, that they idolatry so prevalent in parts of the professing Christian church, in so-called Christian Art, and in the depictions of stained-glass – and even occasionally in the literature of some protestant publications, has given just ground for Islam to complain against these idolatries that have been excused or justified on tenuous grounds. Shame on us! Believe and repent!
His Sources
Equally, it has to be recognized, that a consistently reformed church has repeatedly raised protests against such ecclesiastical excesses and abuses of the truth – we happily profess to be an iconoclastic church: in fact, it is no surprise to discover that the article cited above goes on to note that the religion against which Ibn Hazm sharpened his arguments, was not what we would recognize as authentic Christianity but perversions of it – both ancient and contemporaneous: it included heretical arianism and other sects which have now faded out (and which this author is not familiar with), along with, most likely, medieval Romanism.
His Assumptions
Ibn Hazm did not set out to examine the respective texts of the inspired Holy Scriptures of the Judeo-Christian Canon, and the Quran, from a dispassionate, independent, unbiased approach that modernity might claim. His launching-pad assumption was that the Quran was the infallible, unaltered, Word of God, and that Torah and Gospels should be examined in its light. Since the Gospel writers contradict themselves at many points (or so Ibn Hazm thought), he concluded that the original Scriptures of the Tawrat and the Injl must not only have been badly misinterpreted, but also cunningly mutilated and changed. Or to put it bluntly – because the Quran is True, the Bible must be False.
His Methods
To sum this up, Ibn Hazm scoured the Evangelists for alleged contradictions, and, without placing them in parallel columns, or properly contextualizing each (according to one scholar), went on to show how they were inconsistent with each other: this was proof that these texts were not infallible, and therefore the product of tweaked or erroneous transmission. This was his response that largely rebutted heretics and sects. He proceeded, as I have indicated above, along the lines of logical reason and dogmatic assumption – never for a second did he doubt, if there was a difference between the Quran and the Bible, that it was the latter that was obviously exposed as false.
His Charges
Simply put, he charged the Christian and Jewish Scribes of doctoring the original texts, to such an extent, that we now no longer have access to infallible autographs of the Bible. In other words, the Jews and Christians had altered their Scriptures – the infallible truth, and faithful fulfilment of the Law, Psalms and Gospels, was to be found in Muhammadism, and not, any longer, in Christianity.
His Problems
Novelty
It would seem that one of the major problems with the view of Ibn Hazm is that, with the odd exception, this does not appear to have been the mainstream view of the majority of Islamic commentators prior to himself. Most Muslims seemed to have been fairly oblivious to the allegation that the Torah and Injil had been changed and not transmitted correctly from the originals. Few picked up any such allegation in the Quran itself. There are a number of possible reasons for this: first, they were ignorant of the comments of the Quran itself – but this does not seem to have been the case; second, it was generally held, rather, that quranic references were not to faulty transmission of the Christian Canonical Texts, but rather to twisting the meaning or misinterpretation of their Scriptures, or simply unbelief – this appears to have been the majority if not the nearly unanimous view prior to Ibn Hazm; third, it is quite possible that ignorance of the Old and New Testament library was widespread, such that most muslims simply did not realize that the Quran and the Canon was contradictory and incompatible with each other: they did not yet hold that both could not be the Truth revealed by God – at least in the case of Ibn Hazm, this last incontestable fact does indeed seem to have been to unblushing motive behind his sustained, systematic, determined attack on the inspired writings of the God’s Prophets and Apostles.
Archeology
We might fairly ask, if there are no Bible originals that differ from the copies, but yet all of the copies (even the least faithfully transmitted) substantially agree, and those that diverge most do not deviate significantly at any juncture in doctrine or practice from each other, then this was an unproven dogma and unprovable assumption – Ibn Hazm might well be convinced he was correct to conclude as He did, but it was without any proper warrant.
Methodology
The procedure that Ibn Hazm followed, while detailed enough, and quoting from Gospel sources, was not a fair or faithful treatment 0f the biblical accounts. He made no attempt to follow the accounts in order, to deal with each of the Gospel authors in context. He falsely assumed an order of priority and fidelity to the original text – Gospel reliability faded as the reader progressed from Matthew through John. It is said, Ibn Hazm did line up (but not in parallel columns as is common with synoptists) texts to make comparisons and contrasts, but he must have ignored or not had available to himself, the many faithful expositions and commentaries on the Gospels that had circulated in Jewish and Christian circles: had this been the case, and had he included them in his own research, he would have honestly realized there are multiple, convincing and sound solutions to nearly every alleged discrepancy or apparent contradiction in the Biblical Texts. On another point, though somewhat beside it, the fact that he saw no evidence whatsoever pointing towards the doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament, suggests that he was naive at best, ignorant in a large part, or blind to the proper reading of the Scriptures.
Theology
Another weakness in the case that Ibn Hazm tried to mount was, as one rather helpful article I came across pointed out, that there are several theological implications of his argumentation which he does not seem to have guarded against:
First, it is clear that the Quran contradicted the Judeo-Christians Scriptures in many places.
Second, it was claimed by the Synagogue, Church and Mosque that each set of writings were originally divinely revealed, inspired and preserved by One God.
Third, if it was suggested that the Tawrat and Injil has not been correctly transmitted, then the logical corollary of that was that the One God who inspired them had not been able to preserve them intact (a charge we absolutely refute).
Fourth, if the One God had inspired but failed or not willed to preserve the Scriptures, then He was neither the God of the Bible or Islam – He was not Omnipotent, Omniscient, or Sovereign over all events that come to pass. To suggest that the Bible was not preserved through the process of transmission was to deny both the deity, potency, and veracity of God.
Fifth, this would imply that the God of Islam was different from the God of Christianity or Judaism – and all the claims to be the inheritors of the truth of the original Torah or Gospels were thus false.
Oddity
Though his objection/view is now considered a standard line of argumentation, and regularly cited against Christian evangelists, at the time Ibn Hazm went out on a limb: both before an after, Islamic teachers tread far more carefully with respect to the biblical texts: even several of those notable who post-date Ibn Hazm wrote that Muslims used the Bible to help understand the Quran, should be encouraged to do so, and made a habit of quoting the verses of the Judeo-Christian Canon verbatim – Quran and Bible were interwoven in their writings. This is not to say they denied that the Quran took precedence (for them it most certainly did): but it would suggest that most were not convinced that collection of scrolls in the library of Covenants Old and New had been significantly altered in transmission of the text. On the contrary, the bulk of the evidence suggests that they held the Bible to be largely, if not entirely, intact. We wholeheartedly concur!
Tardy
Ibn Hazm, for all of his scholarship, “came to the game late.” If the dates given for Mohammad, by Islamic scholars, for his birth and death are 570 AD (Mecca) and 632 AD (Mediina), then when Ibn Hazm wrote (between 1022 and 1064), he was writing nearly half a millennium later that the Quran was recorded by dictation from its author. In this intervening period, apart from one or two exceptions, no-one succeeded in seriously questioning the accuracy of fidelity of the copyists of the Jewish and Christian texts.
Other Matters
From an apologetic standpoint, there are many other issues that could be introduced in order to advance a strong case that the claims of Ibn Hazm were sincere but spurious: that would go some way, if accepted, to getting Muslims today to face up the full weight of the Torah, Psalms and New Testament, as impressive evidence for the truthfulness of Christianity, and the sectarian, heretical, errors of the Quran.
A. The prophets and psalms, from start to finish, are replete with predictions of the coming of Messiah, which have been fulfilled in detail by Jesus of Nazareth, as four different evangelists attest: the suffering and glory of Christ, as our Lord pointed out to Cleopas and his companion, are, when properly understood, interpreted and applied, the heartbeat of Moses, Elijah and John: they, and all the other biblical penman, had their heart, mind and will was carried along by the superintending Spirit of God like a ship in full sail.
B. The Old Testament, in shadow, type, apparition, vision, dream and prediction, regularly reveals the Pre-Incarnate Savior before He took our nature to Himself, yet without sin. It is precisely this point that is made in the Prologue in the Gospel of John, that sets the backdrop to all His sermons and signs and sufferings, laid out in human flesh and blood – His claim to be I AM, Heavenly Manna, Resurrection and Life, and so forth, is the very point that we have to receive if we are ever to be saved. There is no room for doubt, as Thomas found out – we must believe Jesus is Lord and God if we are ever to be delivered from the coming wrath. Such necessary faith is the salvific mark of grace. Blessed are those who do not see but yet believe.
C. Miracles in the Gospel are not simply signs that God is at work, but revelations of the divinity of Christ Himself – the fact that He claims to be ISOS (equal) with God, before Abraham, is backed up by the point that He also forgives sin, calms storms, makes loaves, and knows everything. He does not so much ask for miracles to be done, but, by His own authority, and on His own initiative, does them as the Son, in accord with the Father, by the Blessed Spirit. Indeed we might ask with foes or fans: “Who is this?”
D. Further, it has to be said, in addition to the fact that the Bible is the best attested book in ancient antiquity (by some considerable way), if the telephone directory, rather random, incohesive, style of the Quran, even comes close to an “average, literary, work.” Muslims may wax lyrical on all the arguments that Jews and Christians have traditionally used to extol the canonical literature – yet, one honestly has to ask, if it was written today, would it ever see that light of the publication press. By contrast, when the Scriptures are read, even by those who do not believe what they teach, it is evident to most that its consistency, cohesiveness, majesty, quality, turn of expression, depth of doctrine, and delight-inspiring quality, which it claims for itself (see for example Psalm 1, 19 and 119), put the teachings of Islam into the shadows (nay, plunge them into the darkness of the age in which they were composed). The Quran is snooze-worthy, but the Scriptures are praiseworthy.
E. One really has to ask, when the meticulous, near-obsessive, practices of the Masoretes are assessed (as Josh McDowell, a Harvard Lawyer, stressed over 50 years ago in “The Evidence Demands A Verdict), if any collection of documents were ever so faithfully and accurately transmitted as these, so as to remove any reasonable room for doubt as to the accuracy of the Text. God’s astonishing ability to preserve the Text, throughout all the attempts of the Devil to pervert, attack, undermine or destroy the truth, should be self-evident to any honest heart, when due consideration is given to the evidence of the largest Isaiah Scroll in the Qumran Caves – there is no further requirement to substantiate the standardized, Masoretic Text.
F. Finally, you only have to read into the second chapter of the Quran to see the errors emerging thick and fast. For example, it should be self-evident that its author confused the story of Gideon and the call of Saul to Israel to fight – it is recorded in chapter 2 verse 249 of the Quran:
When Talut (or Saul) set forth with the armies, he said: “Allah will test you at the stream: if any drinks of its water, He goes not with my army: Only those who taste not of it go with me: A mere sip out of the hand is excused.” But they all drank of it, except a few. When they crossed the river,- He and the faithful ones with him,- they said: “This day We cannot cope with Jalut and his forces.” But those who were convinced that they must meet Allah, said: “How oft, by Allah’s will, Hath a small force vanquished a big one? Allah is with those who steadfastly persevere.” – Quran Surah 2, Ayah 249.
I fully agree with one Christian writer on this passage who comments as follows:
In regard to his (first) battle, the Qur’an claims that Saul separated the fighters and picked only a few by the way they drank from the river (2:249). Nothing like this is mentioned in 1 Samuel 11-12, the report on Saul’s first battle, or even in the complete account of Saul’s reign ranging over chapters 9 – 31. Instead this story is found in Judges 7, where Gideon lead the Israelites into battle. This is again a historical compression where the author of the Qur’an confuses details of separate stories and weaves them into one. In fact, Gideon’s first battle against the Midianites where this story of separating the men according to their drinking behavior is taken from, took place about 1160 BC, while Saul’s first battle was against the Ammonites, and took place approximately 110 years later! Furthermore, the Qur’an loses the whole point of the testing and separating of men, when Talut supposedly tells his men the terms of the test before they drink. As such it becomes an act of open disobedience instead of means of separating out the soldiers chosen by God according to his secret knowledge as in Judges 4:7-8.
That’s as far as I have got in my reading of this text (and I struggle to recognize Arabic cursive consonants) – it didn’t take me very long to see that, while some of the language sounds quite biblical, it demonstrates the kind of ignorance of the text for which Mohammad and later Islamic scholars berate nominal, apostate and sectarian Christians and Jews. This should, of course, not surprise us one jot: Satan often masquerades as an angel of light (as a vision of even Jibreel or Gabriel himself), but leads away from the truth of the biblical text, and corrupts the message of Christ with a sugar-coating of Scripture-sounding truth. The tragedy is, whereas the synoptics record these very methods employed in the Temptation of our Savior, that those who claimed to be His successors ignored the warnings that were faithfully given by the Evangelists. Still it is true that “Man shall not live by bread alone but by every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God”. What was true in the Desert, was true from the Garden – cults and sects have impressive, domineering, personalities to raise the question: “Did God really say?”
Conclusion
I have to concede that this is only one Middle Aged example of a Muslim Apologist, which I have unearthed in my research into how to win disciples to The One True Faith in Christ – I hope I have been able to shed a little light on one of the lesser known characters and facts of how it came to be widely accepted among adherents of Islam that the Bible the Christians have in their hands has been changed. If it has aroused your curiosity, or spurred you to think of better ways to contradict this foundational error, then I will be satisfied. If there is anything that I have said that does not compute with the truth of the case, I’d be happy to receive clarification and correction. Blessings to all. In Him who is truly Life, Way and Peace.
Usama Dakdok is the Founder of the Straight Way of Grace Ministry. He is the speaker on the daily radio broadcast Revealing the Truth About Islam. Born and raised in Egypt, Usama learned about Islam just as every other student does in a Muslim country. He also studied for a university degree in Egypt which included the study of Sharia, which is Islamic law. He first came to America in 1992. With his knowledge of Islam, he founded The Straight Way of Grace Ministry. Usama speaks fluent Arabic and has translated the Quran into English. He is the author of Exposing the Truth about the Qur’an and Exposing the Truth About Jihad and the booklets The Violent Truth about Islam and The Straight Way to Eternal Life. For many years Usama has travelled the country to equip the church to minister to Muslims and to warn Americans about the deceptive methods being used that lead many into the cult of Islam.
Islam is pushing for world domination. Consider what is happening in France, the UK, Montreal, Canada, and Greece, and also what is being witnessed right here in the United States. A strong contender in the race for mayor of America’s largest city, New York City, is a Muslim man who has called for the defunding of police, the very system of public protection to uphold the law, and has refused to condemn “globalize the intifada.” This is in a city that has the largest concentration of Jews in the U.S. We also see another Muslim rising up vying to be mayor of Minneapolis.
As a matter of fact, just 9 months ago, Voice of America ran a story titled, “Muslim candidates surge in local elections in US.” CBN recently ran a story in which they quoted Israel’s Minister of Diaspora Affairs, Amichai Chikli, who said, “I think it’s very important for Americans to understand that there is a plan of the Muslim Brotherhood. They have a vision, in 100 years, to make America a Muslim state.”
And yet with the trajectory we are presently on, it will take far less than 100 years for this to happen. We’ve got many stories to bring to your attention today, all which focus on Islam’s push for world domination.
Usama Dakdok is the founder of the Straight Way of Grace Ministry. He is the speaker on the daily radio broadcast, Revealing the Truth About Islam. Born and raised in Egypt, Usama learned about Islam just as every other student does in a Muslim country. He also studied for a university degree in Egypt which included the study of Sharia, which is Islamic law. He first came to America in 1992. With his knowledge of Islam, he founded The Straight Way of Grace Ministry. Usama speaks fluent Arabic and has translated the Qur’an into English. He’s the author of Exposing the Truth about the Qur’an and Exposing the Truth About Jihad and the booklets, The Violent Truth about Islam and The Straight Way to Eternal Life.For many years Usama has traveled the country to equip the church to minister to Muslims and to warn Americans about the deceptive methods being used that lead many into the cult of Islam.
President Donald Trump is in the Middle East working out numerous agreements. Some of the actions he’s taken are concerning to a number of individuals. This includes the lifting of sanctions against Syria, the signing of a $142 billion dollar arms deal with Saudi Arabia, a $1.2 trillion dollar economic commitment with Qatar and the offered gift from Qatar to provide a jumbo jet to serve as Air Force One.
Meanwhile, this morning the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on nationwide injunctions including the injunction on ending what is known as “birthright citizenship.” It’s a move that the Council on American Islamic Relations calls, “dangerous and unconstitutional.”
The issue of birthright citizenship and its implications for Islam in the U.S. is just the beginning as Usama also turned his attention to the Abraham Accords, the EU providing 11 million dollars to highlight the contributions of the Qur’an and Islam to European civilization, a Canadian Islamic scholar who praised children who die for Islam (Jim provided audio), the latest concerning the exclusive Islamic city taking shape near Dallas and special news for listeners in Pennsylvania and Florida.
We can be thankful that the horrific grooming gang crimes in Britain are now back in the news, and it has not been allowed to be swept under the carpet and remain covered up. Indeed, international figures have been speaking out on this, and we still hope to fully and properly get this dealt with.
And just recently we had the 18-year-old Axel Rudakubana pleading guilty to the Southport stabbing murder of three young girls in July of last year and a terrorist offence, including possessing an al-Qaeda training manual. He had been known to the authorities for some time, having possessed a knife in school at the age of 13. Nigel Farage has said that the Government needs to “come clean” about this and other attacks, all part of Islamist gangs running wild in the country.
The grooming gang story has been around for many decades now, and I have written a number of pieces on it. Last month for example I said this as I concluded my article: “We must fully support Musk, Badenoch and others in demanding that a true and thorough investigation into this whole sordid affair takes place, and that justice is served, and that heads roll as a result. This should never have been allowed to take place.” https://billmuehlenberg.com/2025/01/05/exposed-uks-grooming-gangs/
Entire books have been penned on this, but it still seems the cover-ups and excuse-making continues in the UK. For example, back in 2016 an important volume on this was released: Easy Meat: Inside Britain’s Grooming Gang Scandal by Peter McLoughlin (New English Review Press).
All the horrific details of the rapes, imprisonment and sexual assaults of mainly young white girls, as well as the unwillingness of politicians, police and authorities to even admit to all this is carefully covered in the book. As McLoughlin says in the Preface:
When we began writing this book in 2013, we were astounded by the refusal of the establishment even to acknowledge the problem of these grooming gangs. Between 1988 and 2011, there was barely one media report per year in Britain concerning their existence. It seemed to us that the principal reasons why these gangs were getting away with their 25-year reign of terror was because a) the gangs were not white whilst most of their victims were, and b) unlike the victims, the gangs were well organised and were also part of a highly-motivated community which would not only help them evade capture, but certain members would actually seek to block any investigation into the activities of the gangs….
As we finished the book, we are aware how much the media have turned on the official narrative peddled by authorities at both the national and local level. When we published this statistic of at least 10,000 victims in an earlier online version, we were mocked; But now senior police officials and Members of Parliament are indicating that the number of victims may be between scores of thousands and even as many as one million. No one is laughing now. (xiii-xiv)
The book covers in great detail the systematic crimes, corruption and coverups, and the clear failure of the multiculturalism cult. The concluding paragraph of the book says this:
An entire generation of non-Muslim school girls across England have been sacrificed to multiculturalism. Every year, and scores of towns in England, a new crop of schoolgirls find some alluring young Muslim man pursuing them with money and flattery, little knowing what his organisation’s true plans for them are. It is within the power of the government to change this immediately, but they refused to follow through on advice given to them 20 years ago by experts in the field. Instead, the media, feminists and politicians simply turn a blind eye to ‘the biggest child protection scandal of our time’. (pp. 303-304)
Incredibly, Amazon has pulled the book, reportedly because of government pressure! That tells us everything we need to know about this horrific scandal that has plagued the UK and leaders like Starmer for so long now. Good thing I bought my copy seven years ago.
Many other experts can be appealed to here. One person who has written often about all this is former Muslim, former atheist, and now Christian writer Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She has much material to choose from here, but let me look at just one recent piece of hers: “‘Hate’ and the Islamic Onslaught on British Values: Part Three” which looks at the bigger picture. She begins:
In view of the contrast between Western and Islamic views of the world, it is predictable that with the arrival in the United Kingdom of a large number of immigrants brought up within Islam, Britain’s social fabric has been battered by cross-purposes. The British people long to believe with well-meaning tolerance that Islam is just another religion like Christianity. In their charity law, for instance, they cling to the universalist notion, formulated in an overwhelmingly Judaeo-Christian context, that all religious causes must be worthy of support. The Charity Commission describes the “advancement of religion” as a charitable aim of “public benefit”. But problems arise if “religion” is extended to include Islam, as to avoid discrimination it must be.
The Quran is clear that charity should be extended only to fellow Muslims within the Ummah, not to unbelievers. Moreover, there are many verses in the Quran which reflect Mohammed’s warrior culture of sex-slavery. These flatly contradict the principles of British law. The historical roots of the differences between the roles of women within Islamic and Western cultures lie very deep. The earliest Muslims were young men, eager for loot in the form of wealth or sex-slaves. As Mohammed says in the Sira or Life of Muhammad (c.760CE): “booty was made lawful for me, as to no prophet before me” (trans. Guillaume, p. 326). The earliest Christians, in contrast, were slaves and women, attracted by a philosophy of personal salvation and universal humanity.
She looks at how Christianity contrasts with this, and also discusses how Muslims seeking to obtain refugee status were pretending to be Christian converts. Too many Brits simply bought all this, hook, line and sinker:
The British emphasis on the element of personal sincerity in religious conversion caused a scandal when it emerged that refugees were persuading gullible priests that they had accepted the doctrines of the Incarnation and Salvation and “converted”, only for it to become apparent that they had no idea whatsoever about the details of New Testament theology. Their motive, crudely, was to gain refugee status. If they were returned to their Islamic countries of origin, as they were aware, they would as Christians be persecuted.
Other confusions indicate a coarsening of Britain’s moral culture. The English word “martyr” has recently almost entirely reversed its meaning. In Christian thought, it is essential that the “martyr” involves no other victim. Only the martyr dies. However, in the recently imported ideology of Islam, the more “infidels” the suicidal “martyr” can take with him into death, the more glorious is his (or her) sacrifice. Saint Thomas spends much of his time in T.S. Eliot’s Christian classic Murder in the Cathedral (1935) agonizing over his motives. Is he perhaps deceiving himself and actively seeking death out of sinful spiritual pride? No such qualm would ever occur to a suicide bomber who takes the path of “martyrdom” in Gaza or Jerusalem or London.
Relatively recently in Britain, they have, at times willfully, lost any sense of the longer historical perspectives still vivid within the world-view of Islam. Until the twentieth century, Westerners were aware of Islam as a threatening cultural Other to be feared. However dimly, they were aware of the Islamic expansion in the millennium following Mohammed’s death which destroyed the world of classical Greek and Latin antiquity so crucial to Western thought. But now we disregard the stories of the recumbent crusaders in churches across the nation, each with his futile contribution to the West’s belated resistance to Islam’s conquests.
Her concluding paragraphs are worth featuring here at length:
At some point during the last thirty years, Britain has lost its sense that Islam is an existential threat to “the West”. Britain is in danger of being brainwashed into believing, or resigning herself to, the fundamentally mistaken slogan that “Diversity Is Our Strength”. Her historical amnesia may prove fatal. She is preoccupied with “decolonization” and reparations for the Western slavery of the Middle Passage, and has no collective memory of the Arab Muslim slave trade, which was larger and longer-lasting than the European trade. Worse, the descendants of Arab slave-traders also remain unaware of their crime, since the genocide it involved was so much more effective than that in the West. Blacks were routinely castrated and their womenfolk married into the Ummah. In Islamic countries there are no Martin Luther Kings or Cassius Clays, aware of their slave descent. Had Mohammed Ali’s ancestor been enslaved by a Muslim rather than a European, he could never have existed, nor converted to Islam. UK conceptions of slavery are highly selective. They forget, for instance, that only two or three centuries ago they might have been snatched from the coast of England by “Barbary Pirates” and sold to an Arab as a slave.
After the Southport killings, politicians leapt on the fact, as for a time it seemed, that the man accused of committing the murders was a Welsh Christian, not a recent Muslim immigrant as some had concluded. Breathing a sigh of relief, they welcomed this evidence that there is no threat to Britain from followers of the Quran, nor ever could be. The urgent task is rather to defend mosques, with the utmost vigor, from “racist” “far-right thugs” who “hate” Muslims. £3 million was allotted to mosques to reinforce security measures against anti-Muslim hate. Is this allocation of resources part of the quid pro quo of votes in return for resources?
Though it does not suit them to mention the fact, our political leaders are aware that the immeasurably greater and growing threat comes from Islamofascist thugs inside these mosques, incited by the hatred of infidels in the Quran. The latest MI5 assessment of terrorist threats (October 2024) breaks down very roughly to 75% “Islamist extremist” and 25% “extreme right-wing terrorism”, though these figures must be interpreted with the proviso that though the threat from Islam is ideologically coherent and centuries-old, other threats are incoherent, eccentric, and transient, or essentially criminal.
British politics is infected with a dangerous bipolarity. As in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, Brits are told that what they see before their eyes and know to be true is in fact wrongthink which they need to correct. After 7/7/05, the Lee Rigby murder, Borough Market, Manchester Arena, Fishmongers’ Hall, and the murders of Asad Shah and Sir David Amess, the correct political response cannot be to demonize anyone who criticizes the ideology which inspired these atrocities. On the one hand, they are aware of the threat from Islam to democracy and freedom of thought. On the other hand, their political leaders tell them that they must at every point yield to the special interests of Muslims.
Even in the 1980s and 1990s and into this century, it seemed that the center would hold. Mere anarchy would not be loosed upon Britain. But today, after decades of mass-migration from Islamic countries which reject the Western values of democracy, individual freedom of conscience, and freedom of speech, the future is uncertain. The last thirty years have entrenched here an aggressive minority, certain that their divinely ordained destiny is to conquer all who refuse to submit, and for whom showing images of the Prophet or scuffing a Quran are without question more serious offences than making death threats. Already, British police seem unable or unwilling to cope with these contradictions. British values are under sustained attack. As long as British political leaders deny this fact, things can and will only get worse. https://substack.com/home/post/p-155294615
She is absolutely right, and things have been getting worse. The death of the UK can be measured by its rejection of it Christian past and its acceptance of all things Islamic. The result is all the diabolical rape, torture and even murder of countless young British girls by barbaric immigrant gangs. Too many elites there somehow view this as being an acceptable price to be paid to be seen as being a non-racist and proud multicultural nation. To hell with this horrid mindset.
Usama Dakdok is Founder of the Straight Way of Grace Ministry. He is the speaker on the daily radio broadcast Revealing the Truth About Islam. Born and raised in Egypt, Usama learned about Islam just as every other student does in a Muslim country. He also studied for a university degree in Egypt which included the study of Sharia, which is Islamic law. He first came to America in 1992. With his knowledge of Islam, he founded The Straight Way of Grace Ministry. Usama speaks fluent Arabic and has translated the Quran into English. He is the author of Exposing the Truth about the Qur’an, Exposing the Truth About Jihad, The Violent Truth about Islam and The Straight Way to Eternal Life. For many years Usama has travelled the country to equip the church to minister to Muslims and to warn Americans about the deceptive methods being used that lead many into the cult of Islam.
While many have falsely called Islam “a religion of peace,” Islam continues in its threats against Israel, Europe and the United States of America. And yet Islam is viewed by many as just being another religion.
Some erroneously teach that the god of Islam and Jehovah God are one in the same. Don’t be deceived. They are not one in the same.
Rapes and sexual assaults continue rampantly in the name of Allah. There are so-called “honor killings” from Muslims against their own family members who leave the teachings of Islam. Threats continue against Jews, Christians and nations that have not surrendered to the teachings of Islam. Usama Dakdok has been trying to awaken many out of their slumber on this issue.
In this insightful video, renowned Christian apologist David Wood delves into the fundamentals of Islam, providing a comprehensive understanding for Christians. “What Every Christian Needs To Know About Islam” covers key beliefs, practices, and historical contexts of Islam, addressing common misconceptions and fostering interfaith dialogue. Perfect for those seeking to enrich their knowledge and engage meaningfully with Muslim friends and neighbors.
0:00 💡 Importance of Christians understanding basic concepts of Islam.
5:14 ⚠️ Ignorance of historical sources about slavery in Islam.
9:56 ⚠️ Misunderstanding of Christian beliefs can lead to fear and rejection.
15:21 💬 Overview of the Quran, Muhammad’s role, and Hadith.
Truth2Freedom's Blog 