In the spirit of American Bedu, here are some posts from another American woman on her experiences with the disgusting mating habits of Islam. She foolishly married a Mohammadan who is now apparently worth about two mill., has six kids, and is of course being treated like dirt in the Kuwaiti courts. And now she has bravely written about her experiences. (She was also interviewed by Front Page.) Hopefully this will save some other poor non-Muslim woman from submitting to Islamic slavery.
“In California there is no way I would have had to endure what I did here. Add to the fact that having a male ”mahram” or guardian is standard when facing the Minstries or Courts here, and I did not have one. … In the beginning I was terrified. Now, it’s very matter of fact and the men are usually very polite and helpful. I seldom deal with the women, as they seem to have animosity towards us foreigners for marrying their men. While I do empathize with their predicaments, I cannot take responsibilty for what I did not know 30 years ago and if they had any clue as to how I feel now, they would not envy me one bit.”
“I am so weary from my own experiences with Kuwait’s laws on marriage and divorce – laws that I deem unjust in the treatment of women.”
Well, of course, in Islamia a woman is, de jure, only worth half of a man. In fact women are usually worth much, much, much less than that.
“I had a heated discussion with my lawyers on my alimony judgment…. If I did not desperately need this money, I would love to tear the check up. The grand total (drum roll please) was $1,800 for the alimony or ”pleasure” payment, and $160 a month for the 3 months ”iddah” or waiting period after the ”talaq” or divorce. This was for 20 years of marriage as a homemaker raising 6 children. As I indignantly explained to my lawyer, the $160 a month was less than a servant would be paid. Mind you, I was married in California, in a Church, with my Catholic father signing as the witness. That’s correct, no Islamic marriage. Ever!”
With all due respect, her father was actually quite foolish. He probably just hoped against hope that everything would work out well. But the marrying priest’s actions are indefensible! (Unless the spouse pretended he was a Christian.) The lady herself recognizes this:
“Let’s focus on this fact: Church officials say that Italy has seen 20,000 marriages in 2005 between Catholic women and Muslims, whose population touches the one million mark. The children born of these couples will be raised Muslim.
“I am totally against Christian or Jewish women marrying Muslim men. The Churches and the clergy are not educating themselves or speaking out enough about this. It’s time for the Christian and Jewish clergy to refuse to marry Christian and Jewish women to Muslim males. If the women insist on marrying Muslim men, they should not expect non-Muslim clergy to support their decision. … Christian and Jewish clergy should not bless, sanction or perform the ceremony. In terms of everything I have explained here today, it makes absolutely no sense for them to do so.”
It’s also a gross insult to Judaism and Christianity for clergy to bless any union with followers of the greatest and most successful blasphemer in history.
“Let these women marry in civil ceremonies. A Minister married me, with no knowledge of Islam back in 1979. And let’s keep in mind: Muslim women are not allowed to marry outside their religion.”
Indeed, Islam colonizes the womb.
“Cardinal Camillo Ruini, the Vicar General of Rome, had said that cultural differences over issues such as the role of women and education of children make it difficult for Catholic women to marry Muslims. ‘The experience of recent years leads us as a general rule to advise against or in any case to discourage these marriages,’ he wrote in a document released recently. “Mixed Catholic and Muslim couples who intend to have a family have other difficulties above and beyond those experienced by other couples, when one considers cultural and religious diversity,” wrote cardinal Ruini, a conservative thinker close to late Pope John Paul II.
“Cardinal Ruini also expressed concern at the growing number of Catholic-Muslim marriages, calling it “intrinsically fragile.” Ruini’s warning echoed a similar one last year by Vatican Cardinal Stephan Hamao, who wrote about what he called the ”bitter experiences” that European women have had in marrying Muslims.”
Any priest who marries a Christian to a Muslim should be immediately excommunicated.
“My marriage here is null and void, as they only use the laws based on the ”husband’s religion” which is Islam. This is the law in Kuwait, a country that does not seem to know the word progressive in terms of women’s rights. Had I divorced in my country, I would be a very comfortable woman, as would my children.”
Hmmm. A Muslim kingdom where women have basically no rights? Who would have imagined?
“After 30 years, I’ve become an expert on corruption.”
Naturally. I suggest she look for work in any of the Western nations being infiltrated by Islam, since she’s so familiar with the sort of rot they will have to endure.
“I think I should set a precedent and demand my God given California-Christian rights here!
“That’s it. I am going to be the first Californian in the Middle East to do what Muslim men do in my country. If Muslims can demand their rights in my country, why shouldn’t I follow suit?”
Yeah, good luck with that!
“I married a Muslim in a Christian ceremony, then endured the Islamic divorce. Never in a million years, did I dream that he would have the inalienable right to add a few more women to this sacred moment.”
So she didn’t know the first thing about Islam. O ye foolish women!
Of course, our heroine is still a free-wheeling Californian at heart (even calling for the legalization of heroin so that Muslim men will not have to be “forced” to sell their little daughters as sex-slaves):
“For the record, I am not against polygamy as a lifestyle ”choice” or ”plural marriages” to use the politically correct American term, as long as it does not hurt those involved and this is my main point. I had the privilege to live amongst a polygamous family. … I did not walk in with judgment, as I am not a judgmental person. I observed. The polygamy itself did not bother me half as much as the facts.
“The fact of the matter is, a Muslim man can marry 4 women provided he can treat them all equally (and this never happens) without her permission.
“Imagine if you will, sharing your most intimate life, thoughts, romance, and having several children with the love of your life. Suddenly, a neighbor informs you that your partner has another wife and 3 children in the next city. I know a woman who found out this way.
“For the record, I have not had to endure this, although I was reminded of this right of his. It seems to be some threat men can throw on a woman. It never worked for me I was never willing to accept it. The terminology used in the Middle East is not ”he married another woman” the term the Arab women use is ”he married on her” the term itself being negative.
“The range of emotions for the wife goes from sadness, embarrassment, shame to devastation. I’ve never seen happiness. The ”other woman” becomes the topic of vicious gossip, unless the first wife is old and never cared about him in any case. Many times, the first wife makes him so miserable he divorces the 2nd wife due to pressure. I’ve seen the shock. You may compare this with finding out your husband has a mistress, but somehow it’s different. This other woman is now in your life forever, her children are in your life forever, whether you see them or not. The other woman has a right to your husband’s inheritance and your children’s inheritance. Furthermore, he has the right to rotate days with you. Now, what if he has 4 wives? Where are your rights in this little scenario? Well, never mind your rights, since you don’t have the right to even know about it.”
How commendable to be so non-judgemental when describing such an obscene parody of matrimony.
“I turned on Dr. Phil last night with T.D. Jakes on the show. They were counseling a couple who had separated in a highly abusive marriage. T.D. Jakes was speaking of course from a Christian point of view on the sanctity of marriage, and his words struck me like an arrow. I begin crying at his empathy for the woman, his words of advice for the husband. He mentioned redemption. He then added ”without repentance, there is no redemption” in regards to owning up to your mistakes. He was speaking to the man who had been abusing his wife, yet was in total denial. A small spark went into his eyes, a spark I hadn’t seen prior. T.D. then went on to say he must ”cherish” his wife. They were just words, yet the words struck hard. The key words here were ”cherish” and ”wife” … as in singular.
“Would I marry another Muslim man? Definitely not. I say this with deep conviction as I have seen and lived both sides.”
But we wouldn’t want to be judgemental.
A bizarrely self-described “Peaceful Muslim” (bizarre because it’s oxymoronic) comments:
“Funny, after my own disastrous marriage (polygynous, no less) to a Kuwaiti I can also say I will never marry a Muslim man again. That is, if I can ever get the Kuwaiti to make the divorce legal in the courts, which he has thus far failed to do. Once is enough.”
Perhaps Peaceful Muslim ended up in her present dilemma because of her strange ideas about Islam.
She writes that some “distort the image of Allah and His Prophets into the greatest misogyny,” even though Mr Mohammad was clearly a rank misogynist, to say the least.
She also states, “We all know that deception is wrong — especially about the status of your virginity.” I suppose she hasn’t heard of taqiyya.
Anyway, I urge Peaceful Muslim to contact Al-Qaeda, Hama, Hezzbollah, The Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all the rapists and murderers and beheaders and kidnappers who apparently understand Islam and Jihad less than she does.
The U.S. Department of State used to publish, pre 9/11, a helpful document warning Amercan women from throwing away their hard-won liberty. No doubt it was considered too offensive to the fragile Mohammadan ego.
The Saudi-American relationship virtually always blossoms in the States, in a climate that allows dating, cohabitation, children out of wedlock, religious diversity, and a multitude of other Islamic sins which go unnoticed by Saudi relatives and religious leaders thousands of miles away.
American citizen wives swear that the transformation in their Saudi husbands occurs during the transatlantic flight to the Kingdom. There is the universal recollection of approaching Riyadh and witnessing the donning of the black abayas and face veils by the fashionably dressed Saudi women. For many women, the Saudi airport is the first time they see their husband in Arab dress (i.e., the thobe and ghutra). For those American women reluctant to wear an abaya (the all-encompassing black cloak) and for those Saudi husbands who did not make an issue of the abaya prior to arriving, the intense public scrutiny that starts at the airport—given to a western woman who is accompanying a Saudi male—is usually the catalyst for the eventual covering up. Since the overwhelming majority of American citizen wives never travel to the Kingdom prior to their marriage, they are abruptly catapulted into Saudi society.
…
In principle, all Saudi men must marry Muslims or converts to Islam. In practice, many American women blur the issue, participating in a Sharia wedding ceremony but never actually converting.
The pressure to become a Muslim, or to be come a sincere Muslim, is enormous and never-ending. There is no separation of church and state in Saudi Arabia, and at the popular level there is simply no comprehension of religious freedom, of the desire to remain Christian or undecided. One American wife, approaching her tenth wedding anniversary, has been terrorized by relatives who insist that the King has ordered that all women who don’t see the light after ten years must be divorced and deported.
Of course, Mohammad himself mated with numerous non-Muslims, but they were his captives. In fact the Muslim man is instructed to avoid “infidels”, as even a slave is preferable to such a filthy haraam female:
The Koran 2.221: “Do not marry unbelieving women until they believe; a slave woman who believes is better than a free woman who does not believe, even though the latter may appear very attractive to you.”
10 Comments
June 23, 2008 at 12:40 am
”But the marrying priest’s actions are indefensible! ……….”
I AGREE 100%.
Fell upon this by accident, and stay tuned for my eye openers as I tread into the twilight zone and speak more truths.
If you note, I wrote about Cardinal Ruini who has spoken out, and there are other clergy who have naively married Christian women to Muslim men. I am speaking out passionately on this subject!
It must be banned. When I get home, this will be my speech of the decade.
I tried to email you, no contact mail. I am redecorating my blog, then back to some hefty subject matter.
June 23, 2008 at 12:49 am
Hi.
I thought you might be upset by my analysis of your comments. Perhaps, like me, you appreciate people expressing their real thoughts and feelings.
* * * * *
Best of luck to you. However, if I were you, I think I’d just get as far away from Islamia as possible A.S.A.P.
I guess there are complications.
* * * * *
I can’t address Judaism, but it is sad that so many people lack an understanding of the orthodox Christian teaching about inter-faith marriages.
Even an otherwise intelligent person like Jamie Glazov seems to have seen it as a matter of “human rights”. I was surprised that you had to explain to him that you meant people should be free to do whatever they like, but clergy should not be involved in going against their own faith.
An interesting website:
http://interfaith.goarch.org/interreligiousmarriageoc.asp
Even the term “inter-faith” is problematic. It’s generally a matter of Christians marrying other Christians who are part of a different Church/tradition.
And when a Christian marries a Jew, at least they have some harmony in beliefs. To some extent.
But Islam is exactly contradictory to Christianity. It teaches that the Gospels and corrupted. It teaches that Mohammad was the Paraclete (The Holy Spirit. John 16:8: “And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.”), which is absolute blasphemy.
Obviously a refusal to bless a Christian getting married to a Muslim (especially considering what a sin polygamy is), besides being an act of mercy, would also be simply standing up for one’s beliefs.
And as I’m sure you must have realized, talk of “we all worship the same god,” “Islam is the most tolerant religion,” and “Islam protects Christians and Jews” (like the Mafia “protects”) are all a scam.
June 23, 2008 at 1:14 am
“Marriage is one of the sacraments of the Orthodox Church. Orthodox Christians who marry must marry in the Church in order to be in sacramental communion with the Church. … The first marriage of a man and a woman is honored by the Church with a richly symbolic service that eloquently speaks to everyone regarding the married state. The form of the service calls upon God to unite the couple through the prayer of the priest or bishop officiating.”
…
“Though the Church would prefer that all Orthodox Christians would marry Orthodox Christians, it does not insist on it in practice. Out of its concern for the spiritual welfare of members who wish to marry a non-Orthodox Christian, the Church will conduct a “mixed marriage.” For this purpose, a “non-Orthodox Christian” is a member of the Roman Catholic Church, or one of the many Protestant Churches which believe in and baptize in the name of the Holy Trinity. This means that such mixed marriages may be performed in the Orthodox Church. However, the Orthodox Church does not perform marriages between Orthodox Christians and persons belonging to other religions, such as Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any sectarian and cult group, such as Christian Science, Mormonism, or the followers of Rev. Moon.”
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article7101.asp
June 23, 2008 at 1:28 am
From I Corinthians 7
Let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
From Ephesians 5
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. For we are members of His body.
For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” [Genesis 2:24]
This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
June 23, 2008 at 1:43 am
P.S.
The Viking Invasion Of Ireland
The Vikings heard of the riches that Irish monasteries held.
In 795 the first Vikings in Ireland landed on the Irish shores with their Viking ships attacking their first Irish monastery in Rathlin Island located near County Antrim. Attacks on Ireland remained very few over the next 30 – 40 years with attacks taking place approximately once a year. It is known the Irish resisted these attacks on a few occasions and in 811 seen the Ulaidh slaughter Vikings attempting to raid Ulster. In 823 the Vikings attacked and pillaged Bangor and repeating these attacks again the next year.
At first the Vikings in Ireland stayed within 20 miles of the coast unsure what lay ahead inland keeping their attacks on coastal monasteries and made more permanent settlements with their first “wintering over” located at Lough Neagh during 840-841. Then between 841-842 settlements were established in Dublin, named Dubhlinn, and then Cork and Waterford which was named Vadrefjord.
849-852 saw the arrival a new Viking, the Danes who were named by the Irish as the dark foreigners. The more settled Vikings in Ireland, the Norse named the fair foreigners, quickly went to battle with the Danes in the Irish Sea and Strangford Lough.
In 860 the Vikings of Waterford attacked the King of Israige but were slaughtered and attacks on the Vikings in Ireland increased. In 866 the settlement longphort was destroyed and the King of Northern Uí Néill managed to rid the Vikings from Ulster. Connachtmen in 887 slaughtered the Vikings of Limerick and in 892 Wexford, Waterford and St Mullins Vikings were also slaughtered.
For the next ten years the Vikings focused their attacks elsewhere in Europe but with less opportunities they returned to Ireland in 914 as much larger force with Vikings of Britain joining their attacks in Viking ships.
Ulster became vulnerable with the death of Niall Glundubh in 919 after which the Vikings raided Tír Conaill and attacked Armagh again. Over 32 ships entered Lough Foyle and in 924 they returned to Lough Erne to setup their fleets. Once again Ireland became enslaved by the over whelming power of the Vikings which would not last long.
Irish monks realized their monasteries lacked defenses from Viking attacks and a new form of building was constructed known as ‘round towers’. These round towers in Ireland were built by stone and proved strong in defense with a unique feature of having only one entrance to the round tower that was at least 10ft from the ground so a ladder was needed to gain entry. Round towers can still be seen today dotted around the Irish countryside and their unique features still standing strong.
Niall Glundubh’s son, Muircertach, took revenge in setting up attacks from his base, Grianan of Aileach in County Dongeal, which still stands today and is a perfect example of round forts in Ireland. Muircertach won victories over the Vikings in battles such in 926 on Strangford Lough and in Dublin in 939. He went onto the Scottish Isles with his Ulster fleet attacking Viking settlements in 941 but died in Combat in 943.
Brian Boru of Dál Cais became King of Munster and who was first to call himself High King of All Ireland after his brother was killed during battle. With the help of the Uí Néill, Brian Boru slaughtered the Vikings of Dublin and was seen as the High King in 1002.
One of the main reasons the Vikings failed to take full control of the island is that they made the mistake of getting involved with Irelands internal affairs which seen many clans battle with each other for control of different regions. The Vikings joined forces with the clan of Leciester to defeat Brian Boru and called on forces to come to Ireland from all over the Viking Kingdom.
On Good Friday 1014 the Viking fleet arrived in Dublin bay to battle with Brian Boru. Brian’s Army consisted of his Munster army and the Limerick and Waterford Vikings, who had joined forces with Brian Boru. Although Brian was killed, at an age of 70, as he prayed in his tent for victory the Vikings were driven back to the Viking ships with many being slaughtered on the coast of Clontarf which would see Viking power in Ireland lost forever.
June 23, 2008 at 2:11 am
Muslim Mindset: ‘The hatred is in Muhammad himself’
Jerusalem Post, June 19, 2008
To Westerners and moderate Muslims shocked by the radical form of Islam now topping nightly newscasts, the efforts of liberal-minded Muslims like Tawfik Hamid, Italian Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi and a handful of others may seem like the perfect solution. Not so for Ali Sina, who has a different suggestion: destroy Islam.
Sina, who runs Faith Freedom International – an Internet forum dedicated to debunking Islam – calls himself “probably the biggest anti-Islam person alive.” The publication of his latest book, Understanding Muhammad: A Psychobiography of Allah’s Prophet [http://www.amazon.com/Understanding-Muhammad-Ali-Sina/dp/0980994802], will likely cement that position. In it, Sina suggests that Islam’s central figure suffered from a series of mental disorders, including narcissistic personality disorder, temporal lobe epilepsy and obsessive compulsive disorder.
“These disorders,” he says via telephone, “can explain the phenomenon known as Islam… which is nothing but one man’s insanity.”
Sina grew up a non-practicing Muslim. Raised in Iran, educated in Pakistan and Italy and now living in Canada, he began jousting with believers in the 1990s. What bothered him, he tells The Jerusalem Post, was not the penchant for jihad and intolerance that certain fanatical Muslims displayed, but the foundation for such ills in the Koran and core Islamic texts.
(Through the Faith Freedom Web site, Sina lists canonical references to Muhammad’s actions and offers $50,000 to anyone who can disprove Sina’s charge that Islam’s prophet was “a narcissist, a misogynist, a rapist, a pedophile, a lecher, a torturer, a mass murderer, a cult leader, an assassin, a terrorist, a mad man and a looter.” Respondents relentlessly attack Sina’s motives, but none has won the prize.)
With violent conquest and contempt for non-believers central to the tenets of the faith, Sina argues, attempts to forge a moderate form of Islam are doomed.
“The idea that Islam can be reformed is a fallacy,” he scoffs. “It’s like saying we can reform Nazism and it will be a wonderful party.”
No, says Sina, “The only way to reform Islam is to throw away the Koran; 90 percent of it should be thrown away. You also have to throw away the history of Islam, and you have to completely disregard the Sira” – the Arabic term used for the various traditional Muslim biographies of Muhammad, from which most historical information about his life and the early period of Islam is derived.
For this reason, Sina says, Western suggestions that extremism in Islam can be eradicated if certain imams are quieted, or if Muslims are encouraged to embrace the universalist elements of their faith – but without addressing the extremism inherent in the religion’s texts – are based on a mistaken comparison of Islam to Christianity.
“In the West, people ask whether Islam can undergo a reformation like the one that Christianity underwent. That’s a poor parallel,” he says. “In Christianity, it wasn’t the religion that needed to be reformed, but the church; what Jesus preached was good.”
On the other hand, Sina continues, “In Islam, it’s not the community that is bad, but the religion. Islam has nothing like ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’ Islam is full of hatred, and the hatred is in Muhammad himself. I argue in my book that Muhammad was insane – and that Muslims, by emulating him and by emulating his ways, his insanity is bequeathed to them.”
BY NOW, CRITICS of Islam are fairly common in the West. And there are more than a few former Muslims who have rejected Islam in favor of Christianity, citing the difference between their former religion’s overwhelming focus on hatred and their newfound faith’s central teaching of love and forgiveness. But, like Wafa Sultan, Ibn Warraq, Ayaan Hirsi Ali and the handful of other apostate Muslims demanding that Muslims reject the negative aspects of their religion, Sina’s critiques are especially problematic.
“People have to dismiss me some way, they have to put me down in one way or another. I’m a Jew, I’m a Christian, I’m a Hindu. I’m whatever people want to say in order to discredit me,” says Sina, who closely guards his true identity because of the death threats he receives. “But they can’t ignore my questions.”
Sina has little patience for those who believe they can temper Islam with reason and mutual respect, or for those who remain cowed by the masses of Muslim devotees around the world.
“Islam is the biggest hoax, the biggest lie,” he says. “Yes, a billion people believe it. But truth is truth. People will eventually see it. Believe me, there is no other answer. We will pay a great price until we realize that this is the solution – to undermine Islam itself, to show Muslims that this religion is not from God, that Muhammad was a charlatan and a liar.”
Sina knows that his blunt, outspoken approach can be “problematic.” But he is confident nonetheless that the force of his arguments will ultimately prevail.
“I am sure that, with time, I will convince millions and millions of Muslims, and the foundations of Islam will collapse,” he says.
Already, he continues, Faith Freedom has attracted an impressive amount of attention.
“In Iran, my site is banned. In many parts of Pakistan, it is banned. The list goes on,” he says. “Despite this, I have over 10 million readers in just over two and a half years. And I have received letters from Muslims from all over the world. Muslims everywhere are paying attention. I believe that Muslims everywhere are realizing that something is amiss.
“If I didn’t have so much success in convincing people, then I would not be so confident. But I see that truth works. So many people who are now writing for me and putting things up on Youtube; seven or eight years ago, we were having fierce debates. Now, they are my greatest allies. There are many people who have seen the light after reading FFI and many of them are now working on my side, trying to help others to see the truth.
“This is the way to fight evil. I do not want to kill the enemy. I want to win them as friends and allies. That is the real victory. In this way, we win because we eliminate our enemy, and our enemy wins by eliminating his ignorance and hate. That is why I believe in my cause. That is why I think I am an instrument of peace.”
* * * * *
From Faith Freedom:
Faith Freedom International is a grassroots movement of those who asked prohibited questions and on that account lost their faith. We came to see that Islam is a hoax, an imperialistic ideology, disguised as religion, invented by a narcissist for his own personal gains. We found out that Muhammad was a conman, a ventriloquist who projected his own words into his imaginary dummy deity to fool the gullible. With a promise of a carnal and orgiastic paradise (just for men) and threat of hell he goaded his foolhardy followers to raid and slay innocent people under pretext that they were infidels. He and his merry band of terrorists looted villages and cities, raped the women, and enslaved all who were not killed outright. To this day, Muslim jihadis are following the footsteps of their prophet who bragged, “I have been made victorious with terror” . No other cause is responsible for more deaths than Islam. Our goal is to expose this religion of terror and warn of its danger. We also want to help Muslims see the absurdity of it, end their “us” vs. “them” ethos and embrace the human race in amity. No one is their enemy; it is they who are the enemy to everyone else. We strive for the unity of mankind through the elimination of Islam, the most insidious doctrine of hate. Humanity is one. Let not charlatans like Hitler and Muhammad divide us with their big lies.
Islam can’t be reformed, but it can be eradicated. It can’t be molded, but it can be smashed. It is rigid, but brittle. That is why Muslims can’t tolerate criticism of it. To eradicate Islam, all we have to do is tell the truth. It’s that simple. This was not possible before, but with the help of the Internet, it is now. The insanity of this creed is so glaringly obvious, it boggles the mind. All it takes to see that is to read the Qur’an.
The truth about Islam is out. It’s here on this site. With truth and reason alone we can demolish this tall tower of lies. If you help spread the truth we can bring this house of cards down sooner than anyone can imagine. With truth, the decent Muslims will leave Islam and with each Muslim who leaves, we gain a new soldier in our fight against terrorism. We are growing exponentially. The days of Islam are numbered and better days are ahead. Many of us will see that day. Meanwhile, we may have to go through dreadful times. A storm is approaching. It will wipe out Islam, but it will also destroy millions of lives in its path. We can avoid this Armageddon if we stop lying. Islam is not a religion of peace. It is evil. It is a dangerous cult of death and terror. The proof is here. Let us tell the truth. Save lives, not lies. All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. Do something and save the world. To become a soldier in this army of light, all you have to do is face the truth. This site exists to help. Help spread the truth. Let it reach the world. It will do its work.
Warning:
Dear Muslim: If you love your faith and want to keep it, leave this site NOW. We have set thousands of Muslims free. Some of them were more faithful and more knowledgeable than you. Many of them are now helping other Muslims in their journey to freedom. Truth is very powerful and you may not have the strength to resist it. This site has the potential to undo Islam. This is no hyperbole. It is a reality that is already happening. A silent revolution is taking place, unprecedented in history. If you don’t leave Islam, chances are that your children will. The sun of truth has dawned. Your only chance to remain a Muslim is to keep your head deep in the sand. The more you learn the truth the more you will lose your faith. Truth will set you free, but if you fear freedom leave this site NOW. However, if you feel valiant, meet my challenge and I will remove this site.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/
June 23, 2008 at 3:26 am
From The Autonomist:
Although I’m weak in anthropology, I did get an ‘A’ in biology years ago, and what I learned has given me insight into these strange organisms we call Middle Eastern Muslims. Every organism alive on the planet is good at something. Each has some sort of defense or capability or behavior that gave them an edge over other organisms of past eras and allowed them to evolve to overcome life’s challenges and survive to this day.
Rabbits are fast runners and fast breeders. Tigers are amazingly skilled hunting machines. Elephants are immensely tough and powerful. Monkeys are highly intelligent and adaptable. Frogs have poisonous skin.
But Muslims, like the stick bug and the chameleon and the stone fish, have developed, to an amazing extent, the ability to deceive. And it is that ability that confounds their environmental competitors (you and me) the most.
These types of organisms — “lie-in-wait” predators — must know the full range of behaviors of the organisms they wish to defeat, so as to position themselves correctly for the strike. They are not necessarily strong or powerful, so they must know what frightens, arouses, lures, relaxes, and weakens that which they intend to destroy. For the Muslim, the idea is to exploit our greatest vulnerability — PC thinking.
It is no accident that the Muslims chose to openly start attacking the West on their own turf in the ’60s and ’70s, right around the time when PC ideology in our culture was starting to pick up steam and cloud our collective judgment. Would Muslims have attacked New York while U.S. Grant was president? Or London while King George III was on the throne? How about the Paris riots during Napoleon’s time? I don’t think so.
The Deceiver picked up on this latest dominant PC, therapeutic, Leftist strain in Western culture, and, patient and shrewd as he is, has successfully exploited it for the last few decades. The only time they seem to have paid any price was when the United States had good old-fashioned cowboys at the tiller — Bush I and Bush II.
They continue to try and deceive by maintaining their false cries of victimhood, blustering lies, and ridiculous charades, for they have internalized and mastered what Sun Tsu’s considered the most valuable tactic in warfare:Deception.
They hone these deceptive traits by practicing on themselves, first and foremost, by perfecting the art that most Westerners would call “lying.” But to them it’s not really lying. To them, lying is simply the most effective means at their disposal for saving face, being clever, getting ahead, and trying to appear superior. Remember, deception is the Muslim’s most developed trait; their secret weapon. Its constant exercise is not a matter of shame, it’s a matter of pride.
…
Let’s take a quiz:
Q: Why are there no democracies in the Muslim Middle East?
A: Democracies are based on the possibility of mutually held Agreements between people. Democracy is unsustainable in cultures where lying is acceptable and constant.
Q: Why is every Muslim Middle Eastern country characterized by either rigid oppression or chaotic violence?
A: The coercive use of violence is the only way to ensure Muslims in the Middle East will live up to any obligations, including basic social order and function. Middle East countries where chaos currently reigns, like Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan, are merely examples of what Muslims are like without coercion.
Q: Have you ever seen anything that says “Made in Saudi Arabia”? What was the last thing invented or produced by Middle Eastern Muslims that helped advance humankind? Why are they so incompetent at virtually everything?
http://antiprotester.blogspot.com/2006/04/life-in-iraq-part-ii-civilization-of.html
June 25, 2008 at 6:58 am
Akira, I was not offended by your comments, I am quite accustomed to them. Trust me, nobody could berate ”me” more than ”me” for making a life choice at a very young age.
I don’t live by life’s regrets (and oh, I’ve had some) but I can make my negative experience a positive by speaking out on my reality.
If you recall, back in the 70’s when I married we had not heard anything, and the Iran hostage situation was my first taste of Mid East politics which of course I’ve become an expert on now.
As for my parents, I do wish they had known the truth and begged me not to marry. This marriage has destroyed my family relations, and there is much bitterness for years.
IF I can convince one Clergy man, or one woman of the reality, I have accomplished much. I speak truths and cannot worry about being politically correct. Do Muslim women marry our men? Of course not. So why are we so accomodating when it’s obviously against Biblical scripture?
As for Vikings. I know their history well. I admire the women in my family for their strength.
You may email me, so far I don’t receive anything negative. Truth can cut like a knife, but truth is my sanity. I will be home this summer. Yes, complications.
Peace.
June 25, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Hi Viking,
There’s nothing to feel bad about for not knowing better back then.
What’s frustrating is people who never learn from experience. I don’t mean you; I mean those people who keep trying to square the wheel.
For example, people will say, “Well, this woman married a Muslim, and now she has all these problems because of it, so we should be making it easier for non-Muslim women to marry Muslim men.”
I can understand why you would want the situation there to improve. Of course. Once your in a situation, it’s best to make it as manageable as possible. But it would make more sense to prevent those situations from occuring in the first place.
Like I saw a guy on TV explaining how he tries to enjoy jail and have as much fun as possible, because he’ll be there for life, so he might as well get used to it. Makes sense. But it would be better to avoid jail in the first place.
Another thing I imagine some people would comment about your situation is that “divorce is always difficult,” or “lots of Christian men beat their wives!” No matter how bad Islam is shown to be, some “useful idiot” can be counted on to justify it by such morally relativistic thinking. E.g., “Islam liberated women because according to the Koran a woman is worth half of a man, which, for pagan Arabs, was better than before.” or “Okay, so Mohammad fucked a little girl. You think men don’t do that in America?”
Just about problem that you might have had in a US court, you can have those same problems in Kuwait, PLUS everything else (unable to appear in court without a male guardian, women’s witness less than a man’s etc).
“Truth can cut like a knife, but truth is my sanity.”
Jesus Christ: “You will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.”
Peace.
* * * * *
Is it okay to have sex with your one-year old bride? No! Muhammad is the model. He waited till she was a mature 9-year-old!
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8d4_1214302019
Jesus Christ: “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”
* * * * *
Islam off-limits at UN:
Associated Press reported Thursday that “Muslim countries have won a battle to prevent Islam from being criticised during debates by the UN Human Rights Council.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/021517.php
* * * * *
Rape in Brussels: Less and less women on the street
A 21 year old woman was pushed against an ATM machine in the Brussels South station by two young men and raped last week. According to the victim, at least three travelers passed by, but nobody tried to help her. Around 9pm Lola arrived at the South station in a train from Waterloo. She walked over to an ATM when suddenly tow you men asked her in a threatening tone why she didn’t wear a headscarf as she should.
http://sheikyermami.com/2008/06/25/update-on-the-rape-in-brussels-less-and-less-women-on-the-street/
In a number of neighborhoods in Brussels there are less and less women on the street. Muslim girls are troubled if they don’t wear a headscarf. Ethnic Belgian women are jeered at and called whores if they dare show a piece of naked belly. “An atmosphere of intolerance prevails. Ethnic Belgian women tel me that they wear a scarf because then they aren’t bothered any more.”
State Secretary Brigitte Grouwels says that that’s an unacceptable situation. The women of Brussels will not tolerate it any more.
[Rubbish. They do tolerate it. And feminists always defend the Jihadis.]
Four female Brussels parliament members blame Brigitte Grouwels for that. Without being acquainted with the problems they think that the State Secretary stigmatizes the whole Moroccan neighborhood and stimulates the feeling of insecurity.
* * * * *
Recognise polygamous marriages, says Sheikh Khalil Chami
(AAP) June 25, 2008
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23916409-662,00.html
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2008/06/pushing-for-polygamy-in-australia.html
http://sheikyermami.com/2008/06/24/australia-recognise-polygamous-marriages-says-sheikh-khalil-chami/
MEMBERS of Sydney’s Islamic community believe polygamous marriages should be recognised to protect the rights of women.
Sheikh Khalil Chami of the Islamic Welfare Centre in Lakemba yesterday said polygamous marriages, although illegal, existed in Australia and should be recognised.
“… Not an open door but in a way everyone will have control,” he told Triple J’s Hack program.
“It’s a bit hard, very difficult, but unless we face it, how (do) we overcome it?
“If you know there is law that will help you, there is community will help you. Why not? Why not change the law?”
Sheikh Chami said he was asked almost weekly to conduct polygamous religious ceremonies.
While he declined to perform such ceremonies, he said, other sheikhs did not.
“There are a lot of sheikhs here without any qualifications, without any place,” he said.
“They’ll conduct that marriage no problem at all.”
Islamic Friendship Association of Australia president Keysar Trad said recognising polygamous unions would help protect the rights of women in the relationship.
Mr Trad once proposed to another woman with the consent of his wife, Hanefa, but the second marriage did not proceed.
“I certainly would not have entertained the thought of having a relationship without a religious marriage and I thought the relationship with that person was developing to the stage where we had become too friendly with each other,” he told the program.
“Rather than entertain any thoughts of an affair I thought the only decent thing to do was to consider a proper commitment to that person.
“This idea of plural sexual relationships, it is not so much frowned upon by society as long as these people don’t say we want a polygamous relationship.”
Mr Trad’s mother was a third wife in a polygamous relationship overseas and he said the women had admiration and respect for each other and supported each other.
“In a sense, it’s a compliment to the original partner that if he didn’t find marriage to be so good why would he go into it again,” he said.
“In a sense, he’s saying that his first wife has made life like heaven for him so he’s willing to provide the same service, love and support to a second woman.”
He said women were choosing to enter into such marriages.
Mrs Trad said many people in polygamous marriages kept it a secret – not only because it was illegal, but because society did not accept it.
“Tell you the truth, the hardest part of it (is) the way the others perceive it not what’s happened between me and him,” she said.
Asked if it was just about wanting sex with more women, she said: “Yeah it can be, but having it in the right way instead of having it in like go to prostitute or just date”.
June 26, 2008 at 11:34 am
Akira: I am on the same wave length. You see, for women in the U.S. (and all over) they had to fight and be tortured to achieve their rights.
Women over here must do likewise to force change.
My only goal now is to speak out in my country for my women not to make this mistake to begin with. To speak to ”our” clergy to wake them up. That’s called preventative medicine.
To not marry the ”yoked” to the ”unyoked” is the first step.
On Belgium:
”Ethnic Belgian women tell me that they wear a scarf because then they aren’t bothered any more.”
This is insanity.