Marked for Death: Islam's War Against the West and Me (8 page)

By then, Christianity had been weakened by 300 years of theological disputes that had led to the emergence of strong heretical churches rejecting the divine nature of Christ and the existence of the Holy Trinity. The heresies of Arianism, Nestorianism, Monophysitism, Ebionism, and the Nazarene sect became the dominant forms of Christianity in many regions—though not in Rome, Constantinople, or the Greek heartland of the Byzantine Empire.

Many of these heretical movements felt attracted to the simplicity of Islam, which adhered to similar beliefs that there was no Trinity and that Jesus was not divine but merely a prophet of God. Consequently, Monophysite Syria and Arian North Africa and Spain could not muster the resistance to oppose Islam. By 700, Christianity had lost more than half its territory. In contrast, Trinitarian Christianity—whether Greek Orthodox or Roman Catholic—resisted Islamic encroachments. Constantinople, the Byzantine capital, was besieged twice by the Arabs, in 674-78 and in 717. The Byzantines held Islam at bay for 800 years, twenty-five generations long, before finally succumbing to the Turks in 1453. The valiance of the Greeks, the tenacity of Byzantine culture, and the strength of Constantinople’s walls saved the rest of Europe from an Islamic invasion from the East. In 1683, the Turks pressed into the heartland of Europe but were defeated at Vienna by John III Sobieski, the King of Poland.

Islam’s western assault on Europe had already been stopped at Tours 950 years earlier, in 732, by Charles Martel and his ferocious Franks. The Franks had converted from Germanic paganism to Trinitarian Christianity around 500 AD. If they had become Arians like the Goths and the Vandals, history might have taken a far different course.

I have no idea what Charles Martel told his army before confronting the Muslims at Tours. It may have been something Rooseveltian like, “We stand at Armageddon, and we battle for the Lord,”
⁴⁰
or it may have been a simple appeal to self-preservation. It certainly was not an Obama-style speech about them and us sharing the same values and believing in the same god.

Teddy Roosevelt understood the importance of the victories at Tours and Vienna for the survival of Western civilization. “Christianity is not the creed of Asia and Africa at this moment solely because the seventh century Christians of Asia and Africa had trained themselves not to fight, whereas the Moslems were trained to fight. Christianity was saved in Europe solely because the peoples of Europe fought,” Roosevelt wrote in his 1916 book
Fear God and Take Your Own Part.
He continued, “Wherever the Mohammedans have had a complete sway, wherever the Christians have been unable to resist them by the sword, Christianity has ultimately disappeared. From the hammer of Charles Martel to the sword of Sobieski, Christianity owed its safety in Europe to the fact that it was able to show that it could and would fight as well as the Mohammedan aggressor.”
⁴¹

Then Roosevelt added something worth pondering for those who believe all religions share the Golden Rule—that is, that we should do unto others as they would do unto us:

To make a statement that all religions are the same is as naive as saying that all political parties are the same. Some religions and belief systems give a higher value to each human life and some religions and belief systems give a lower value. As generations of Americans past, our time has come to defend the beliefs and values that made this nation great, such as equality before the law.... There are such “social values” today in Europe, America, and Australia only because during those thousand years the Christians of Europe possessed the warlike power to do what the Christians of Asia and Africa had failed to do—that is, to beat back the Moslem invader.
⁴²

Islam is not a religion preaching that we must do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Instead, it is a totalitarian system aiming for political domination of the world. The Nazis understood this too, recognizing in Islam a kindred evil soul. Adolf Hitler deplored the fact that the Germanic Franks had won in Tours in 732. “Had Charles Martel not been victorious,” Hitler told his inner circle, “then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism, that cult which glorifies the heroism and opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so.”
⁴³

Albert Speer, Nazi Germany’s Minister of Armaments, wrote in his diary that Hitler regretted that Muhammad had not come to the Germans instead of the Arabs. “It’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion,” he told Speer. “Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?”
⁴⁴

Similarly, Heinrich Himmler, the leader of the SS, told Felix Kersten, his masseur and confidant, he was aghast that King Sobieski had halted the Turks at the gates of Vienna in 1683.
⁴⁵
Referring to Muhammad’s vow that Muslims who die while waging jihad, Islam’s holy war, go straight to heaven and have sex with beautiful women for eternity,
⁴⁶
Himmler declared, “This is the kind of language a soldier understands. When he believes that he will be welcomed in this manner in the afterlife, he will be willing to give his life, he will be enthusiastic about going to battle and not fear death. You may call this primitive and you may laugh about it, but it is based on deeper wisdom. A religion must speak a man’s language.”
⁴⁷

Documents in the German Federal Archives in Berlin confirm that the SS leadership considered Islam to be “a practical and sympathetic religion for soldiers” because “it promises heaven for those who fall in battle.”
⁴⁸

Polygyny was appealing to the Nazis for the same reason it appeals to Islam. “Women are your fields: go, then, into your fields as you please,” says the Koran.
⁴⁹
In his 1993 book
Some to Mecca Turn to Pray,
British professor Mervyn Hiskett, who spoke of Muslims with much sympathy, referred to a colleague of his, a “senior Muslim academic of the highest personal integrity, who holds an Honours Degree and PhD of a British university. He is far from being a militant of the stamp of the ayatollahs but is simply a strict and principled Muslim.” This man had four wives. “He argues that the future of Islam, and the fulfillment of the Islamic imperative to make Islam the religion of all mankind, largely depend on maintaining the Islamic rule of polygyny.”
⁵⁰
In a similar vein, Himmler encouraged his SS men to have as many “Aryan” children as possible.
⁵¹

It should come as no surprise that the Nazis also admired Islam’s zeal for dehumanizing and slaughtering Jews. “We changed [the Jews] into detested apes,” says the Koran.
⁵²
“We said to them: ‘You shall be changed into detested apes,’”
⁵³
“transforming them into apes and swine.”
⁵⁴

The admiration between Nazism and Islam is mutual. In 1941, Mohammad Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who led several anti-Jewish pogroms in the Middle East in the 1920s and ’30s, visited Hitler and Himmler in Berlin. Adolf Eichmann, the overseer of the Holocaust, gave him a private tour of Auschwitz and showed him the gas chambers. At the post-war Nuremberg Trials, Dieter Wisliceny, Eichmann’s deputy, revealed, “The mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures.”
⁵⁵

German scholar Johann von Leers, a favorite of Hitler’s who wrote the Fuhrer’s official biography, also repeatedly expressed his great admiration for Islam. “Mohammed’s hostility to the Jews had one result: Oriental Jewry’s backbone was broken.... If the rest of the world had adopted a similar policy, we would not have a Jewish Problem,” Leers wrote. “As a religion, Islam indeed performed an eternal service to the world: it prevented the threatened conquest of Arabia by the Jews and vanquished the horrible teaching of Jehovah by a pure religion, which...opened the way to a higher culture for numerous people.”
⁵⁶
After the war Leers settled in Egypt, where he worked for the Egyptian Information Department until he died in 1965. He converted to Islam and changed his name to Omar Amin “in honor of my friend Hadj Amin el Husseini, the Grand Mufti.”
⁵⁷

It is ironic that some of my critics accuse me and other patriots—who defend our national identity against Islamization and who honor Charles Martel and John III Sobieski as heroes of Western civilization—of fascism and Nazism. It is Islam that lays claim to that charge.

“There’s one rule that lies at the heart of every religion—that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.” So proclaimed President Barack Obama during his Cairo address on June 4, 2009.

Obama’s Muslim audience applauded. But they knew full well, just as Teddy Roosevelt did, that there is no Golden Rule in Islam. In fact, the Koran states explicitly that non-Muslims are to be treated much worse than Muslims. “Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends,” it says.
⁵⁸
It further commands, “When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them.”
⁵⁹
This is consistent with Muhammad’s infamous order to his followers, so often repeated throughout the Islamic world today, “You will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will betray them saying, ‘O Abdullah [slave of Allah]! There is a Jew behind me; so kill him.’”
⁶⁰

“The reason I am against Islam is not because it is a religion,” says Ali Sina, an Iranian ex-Muslim who lives in Canada, “but because it is a political ideology of imperialism and domination in the guise of religion. Because Islam does not follow the Golden Rule, it attracts violent people.”
⁶¹
While President Obama is apparently unaware that Islam is a cult of hatred,
⁶²
that fact has been widely known for many centuries in both the West and the East. Defenders of Western civilization should not sugarcoat Islam or downplay its violent tendencies out of a misguided fear of offending its adherents. To the contrary, we must boldly state the truth about Islam’s inherent brutality, as proven time and again throughout history and as shown in Islam’s own holy book. Otherwise, we risk repeating the mistake made by the tolerant inhabitants of Yathrib and Mecca before their cultures were wiped away by the aggressive ideology they had once welcomed within their walls.

CHAPTER FOUR

In the Dark Doorways

How dreadful are the curses which
Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!

—Winston Churchill

T
he smell of burned flesh fills the air, and the charred corpses of schoolgirls blight the landscape. Welcome to Mecca!

On Monday, March 11, 2002, fifteen Saudi girls died as they attempted to flee from their school in Mecca, Islam’s holiest city. A fire caused by an electrical short circuit had set the building ablaze. The girls ran to the school gates but found them locked—a typical measure in Saudi Arabia meant to ensure full segregation of the sexes.
¹

The keys were held by a male guard who refused to open the gates because the terrified girls were not wearing the correct Islamic dress including face veils and black robes. As the “indecently” dressed girls frantically tried to escape the fire, Saudi officers beat them back into the burning building. Members of the
Mutaween,
²
the “Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice,” as the religious police are known in Saudi Arabia, also beat passers-by and firemen who tried to save the girls. “It is sinful to approach them,” the officers warned the girls’ would-be saviors.
³

It is not only sinful, it is also a criminal offence. The Mutaween roam the Saudi streets to enforce dress codes, gender segregation, and the proper performance of Islamic prayers. In Saudi Arabia, even Westerners who do not dress properly or wear non-Islamic religious symbols are beaten and imprisoned by the religious police.

The tragic fate of the fifteen Saudi schoolgirls is indicative of the low status of women in Islam, a “religion” that deems prayers to be nullified if a dog, a donkey, or a woman pass in front of praying men.
⁴
Nevertheless, the Mecca incident drew angry reactions from many Muslims whose basic sense of humanity was violated by the barbarity shown toward the schoolgirls. Despite the hate-filled, misogynistic tenets of Islam, humanity prevailed in the Meccan fathers who were incensed over their daughters’ deaths, in the firemen who confronted the Mutaween and attempted to save the girls, and in the Saudi journalists whose coverage of the fire featured rare criticism of the powerful and much-feared religious police.

The fact that many Muslims refuse to act according to Islamic scripture is an amazing testament to the resilience of human nature. People have withstood 1,400 years—a staggering fifty generations—of relentless indoctrination in the Islamic world, yet the human instinct for love and kindness endures. If the findings of a 2006 Gallup poll run by Dalia Mogahed are correct, and only 7 percent of Muslims can be considered “radical,”
⁵
this means human nature is so strong that almost a millennium and a half of brainwashing could not eradicate it.

The outrage over the schoolgirls’ deaths, however, was unusual—in Islamic societies, protests against Islamic inhumanity are rare. Even in Western countries, most mosque-attending Muslims listen without objection as imams recite repulsive sermons that invoke Koranic verses meant to stir up hatred and paranoia.

In October 2006, Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, the Grand Mufti of Australia and New Zealand, held a sermon in Sydney’s Lakemba Mosque, Australia’s largest. Hilali argued that gang rapes can’t be blamed entirely on their perpetrators, since there are women who wear makeup and dress immodestly. Moreover, some women “sway suggestively... and then you get a judge without mercy and [he] gives you 65 years,” the Grand Mufti proclaimed in defense of Bilal Skaf, an Australian Muslim who had been involved in multiple gang rapes. “But the problem,” Hilali shouted furiously, “but the problem all began with who?” He answered his own question by comparing women to meat: “If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem.” He added, “If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab [Islamic head covering], no problem would have occured.”
⁶

Hilali told his congregation that women are “weapons” used by Satan to control men. The responsibility for adultery, he said, “falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement.”
⁷
Although Hilali’s remarks later provoked anger and ridicule throughout Australia, not one member of his congregation raised his voice to object on behalf of his own wife (or wives), daughter, or sister. None of them felt the need to declare that women should not be compared to meat and cannot be blamed for being raped.

Why do so few Muslims speak out against the inhuman aspects of Islam? The radicals, obviously, agree with these strictures. As for the moderates, I believe they remain mostly silent for three reasons. First, in light of the radicals’ penchant for intimidation and violence, many moderates are afraid of the consequences of speaking out. They are simply cowed into silence, even though they are well aware that these inhuman aspects form the core of Islam, and that there is no such thing as “Islam with a human face,” just as there was no real “socialism with a human face” or “national-socialism with a human face.” Second, invoking Islamic fatalism, some believe it is useless to speak out because things are the way Allah desires them to be, and no one can do anything about it. And third, many Muslims, even if they themselves are moderate, have been indoctrinated by Islam into
islam
—“submission.” They mostly do not notice the inhumanity anymore because they have grown accustomed to it.

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!” Winston Churchill wrote.
⁸
Indeed, one cannot but pity Muslims, having been subjected to 1,400 years of horrific brainwashing. Imagine if Adolf Hitler had established his thousand-year Reich—how would this have affected Europeans? What would they be like after 1,400 years of that kind of malevolent indoctrination?

It was Muhammad himself who turned Arabia into a misogynist society. In pre-Islamic Arabia, a woman could run her own business and propose marriage to a man. In fact, Muhammad’s first wife, Khadija, was a merchant who had inherited and vastly expanded her father’s business. When Khadija was forty years old and had been widowed twice, she proposed to and married Muhammad, one of her employees, who was fifteen years her junior. While they were married, she was Muhammad’s sole wife. He only became a polygynist after her death, when he announced to his followers that Allah permits a man to have several wives.
⁹

The Koran states that if someone needs witnesses for a legal matter, he has to find two men, “but if two men cannot be found, then one man and two women.”
¹⁰
This verse establishes the concept that in Islam, a woman has half the worth of a man. Similarly, when it comes to inheritance, “A male shall inherit twice as much as a female.”
¹¹
A man can also divorce his wife at will, even if she is blameless, while a woman has no equivalent power toward her husband. In light of the inferior position Islam assigns to women, it should be no surprise that the Koran approves of wife beating. If a man fears disobedience from his wife or wives, the Islamic holy book says, he should “admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.”
¹²

Numerous Koranic verses decree that women must cover themselves. One example is: “Enjoin believing women ... to cover their adornments ... to draw their veils over their bosoms and not to reveal their finery.”
¹³
This verse immediately follows a verse that says, “Enjoin believing men to turn their eyes away from temptation and to restrain their carnal desires.”
¹⁴
It is no coincidence that one verse follows the other; according to Islam, women have to cover themselves to spare believing men of carnal temptation. If a woman, however modest, awakens the lust of a Muslim man, then she, not he, is to blame. This is why women in Islamic societies have to dress like mummies. This is also why a Muslim man who sexually assaults a woman, especially if she is not a Muslim, is typically not held responsible in Islam. The woman should not have tempted him. If
he
is tempted,
she
is the whore.

If Muslim women behave “lewdly,” their families sometimes kill them in order to save the family’s honor. “Confine them in their houses till death overtakes them,” says the Koran.
¹⁵
Honor killings are a pervasive problem throughout the Islamic world, and as Islamic immigration to the West intensifies, the West too has experienced more and more Islamic honor killings. In December 2007, Aqsa Pervez, a 16-year-old teenager from Mississauga, Canada, was strangled by her father for her refusal to wear a
hijab,
the Islamic headscarf.
¹⁶
In January 2008, 18-year-old Amina Said and her 17-year-old sister Sarah were murdered by their father in Lewisville, Texas, because “they had boyfriends.”
¹⁷
In June 2007, Zeynep Boral, a 24-year-old law student, was killed in Alkmaar, the Netherlands, by her ex-husband, also her cousin, because she was too westernized and had divorced him.
¹⁸
In October 2009, 18-year-old Laila Achichi was burned alive by her parents and an “exorcist” in Antwerp, Belgium, because she was a lesbian.
¹⁹
In February 2005, 23-year-old Hatun Sürücü was shot dead by her brothers in Berlin, Germany, because she was “a whore who lived and dressed like a German.”
²⁰
In October 2002, 16-year-old Heshu Yones was stabbed to death in London, England, by her father because she “was becoming westernized” and did not cover her hair.
²¹

In one particularly coldblooded honor killing, on January 29, 2012, a Canadian court convicted three Muslims—Afghan immigrant Mohammad Shafia, one of his wives, and his son—of murdering Mohammad’s three teenage daughters and his other wife. The awful details of this case almost defy belief. Longtime victims of domestic abuse in their Islamic household, the three murdered girls, the youngest being thirteen years old, were forcibly drowned for supposedly dishonoring their family by dressing like Westerners and choosing their own boyfriends. (The murdered wife in the polygynous family, according to the
Wall Street Journal,
was killed “because she was a troublesome first wife and lenient step-mother.”)
²²
Mohammad so hated his daughters that even after their deaths, he called them “filth and whores” and ranted that someone should defecate “on their graves.”
²³

Of all the terrible aspects of the Shafia girls’ murders, one of the most disturbing is that there were “a dozen school officials, helping professionals and police officers in Montreal who personally either knew the teenage girls in that family were in dire straits or underestimated warning signs.”
²⁴
But the authorities, hobbled by political correctness, failed to save the girls from their tormentors. As the
National Post’s
Robert Fulford wrote,

The Shafia girls were likely the victims, not only of a crime, but of our perverse national habit: We emphasize multicultural propriety more than the welfare of individual human beings. And this goes triple for Muslims.

That’s the background that shapes the day-to-day policies of teachers, social workers and even police. It makes them overly anxious to conciliate, to mollify. It disarms their best instincts and prevents them from doing what they would want to do: Get potential victims out of danger.
²⁵

In a sad testament to the media’s enduring determination to whitewash the “religion of peace,” both the Associated Press and NBC News reported on the jury’s guilty verdict in the Shafia case without mentioning the words “Muslim” or “Islam.”
²⁶

As the Shafia case shows, in Islam, the constant fixation on how women dress is the key to a proper society. “In Islam, women are the slaves of men,” says Taslima Nasrin.
²⁷
Like Wafa Sultan, Taslima Nasrin is a physician from an Islamic country who saw firsthand the devastating physical results of the abuse of women by the followers of Muhammad. Like Wafa, she had to flee for her life when she began to speak out against these crimes. And like Wafa, she now lives as an exile in the United States.