Some people don’t want to learn about Islam from someone who was not a Muslim, a professor or some other “approved” source of information. How can someone without a degree in Islam be an expert on it?
The question is who can we trust to tell the truth about Islam? The answer you will get by going by talking to Muslims has the advantage that if you choose the right country and the right Muslim, you will get the “right” answer. But if you ask the “wrong” Muslim (usually called an extremist or radical Muslim) you will get the answer you won’t like. Is Saudi Arabia or Turkey the right country to go to? Is a Wahabbi imam or a Islamist scholar of Islam the right person to ask? Subjective Islam is a polling problem. Who you ask determines the answer you get. Apologists for Islam ask the “expert” who gives them the answer they want—Islam is wonderful.
But there is one source of knowledge about Islam that is not subjective. If you talk to Muslims, you will find that there is one thing that they all agree on: There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger. This statement is the beginning of Islamic objective knowledge, since 100% of all Muslims believe it.
Allah is found in the Koran. When you read and understand the Koran, you find that there are 91 verses that command all Muslims to imitate Mohammed, the divine human prototype. We find out what Mohammed did and said in order to imitate him in two places – Mohammed’s biography, the Sira, and his Traditions, the Hadith. And that is all there is to know about Islamic doctrine:
- Koran
- Sira
- Hadith
Objective truth: if it is in the Koran, Sira and Hadith, it is Islam. Islam is Allah and Mohammed, no exceptions. So skip asking a Muslim, going to a Muslim country or asking a professor. For objective answers, ask Mohammed and Allah. In other words, read the Koran, Sira and Hadith. The problem is that no one reads them is because they used to be difficult. Today are available because simple scientific methods have produced versions that anybody can read. For one example, see the Trilogy Project.
Statistical methods reveal that there are two Korans, Mecca and Medina, and that there are two Mohammeds. In Mecca the Koran is religious, but only a 150 people became Muslims in 13 years time. Later in Medina, Mohammed became a politician and a jihadist, and the Koran becomes jihadic and political.
There are two Islams, two sets of facts – Mecca and Medina. Preaching the religion in Mecca was a failure. But, Mohammed averaged an event of jihad every 6 weeks for the last 9 years of his life, and by the time he died, every Arab was a Muslim. So if you want peaceful Islam go to Mecca. If you want politics and violence, go to Medina. Islam is a dualistic system where peace and jihad exist side by side. Dualism allows “experts” to get what they want, a peaceful Islam in Mecca. See, there it is in the Meccan Koran—peace. Just don’t ever mention Medina and the news is good.
However, the only trustworthy experts are Mohammed and Allah, found in Islam’s texts. They will tell you the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So, here is the rule to grade your experts: listen to those who quote Mohammed and Allah. And ask the expert: What else does Islam teach about this? Get the whole truth, the whole story.
Better yet, since the Koran, Sira and Hadith have been made readable by the average person, read the texts and become an expert yourself by quoting Allah and Mohammed. You will bring objective Islam to your world.
Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink https://politicalislam.com/subjective-islam-objective-islam/
Copyright © CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.
www.politicalislam.com
The most difficult thing to understand about Islam is discerning the mixed message we keep hearing. The government, media and professors talk about a wonderful Islam that is a blessing to humanity and America, in particular. This Islam is so wonderful that anyone who resists it is a bigot, a hater, an Islamophobe. But there is another Islam that lurks in the background—violence, rape, lies, deception, and ever increasing Muslim immigration.
So which is it? Is Islam a blessing or a curse? More importantly, what is the basis for making such a decision? There is one and only one basis for making any judgment about Islam—its doctrine. That basis is not the opinions of TV commentators, the newspaper, the professor, or even the Islamic scholar or imam. The only basis for any factual statement about Islam comes from the Koran and the Sunna, the perfect model of Mohammed’s actions and words. The Sunna is found in the Hadith, the traditions of Mohammed, and the Sira, his biography.
What does Islamic doctrine tell us about wonderful and warlike? Oddly enough, it tells that both are true.
The first place to look for violence is to see what Islamic doctrine says about jihad.
In Mecca, the texts have nothing to say about jihad. So in Mecca we have a peaceful Islam, but in Medina we have violence. Both the Sira and Hadith confirm the peaceful nature of Islam in Mecca and its unlimited violence in Medina.
We read a lot about Islamic Jew-hatred, but the rabbis love to go and “dialogue” with Muslim leaders. At these dialogues, the Jews are told how they are “brothers” to the Muslims. But, later we hear the war cry:
Khaybar, Khaybar, oh you Jews! The army of Mohammed is here for you!
Which is it? Is Islam a Jew lover or a Jew hater? Look at the data:
With the Jews, we see the same dualistic picture. In Mecca, most of the Koran is positive about them; Mohammed is presented as the final prophet of the Jews. In Medina, he annihilated every single Jew in Medina.
When Mohammed was in Mecca, he preached the religion of Islam and converted 150 Arabs to Islam. When he went to Medina he became a politician and warrior and converted an average of 10,000 per year to Islam. See the graph below. Which is the real Mohammed? Is he a peaceful preacher or a violent warrior?
Look at the Koran. In Mecca the Koran is about religion and hymns to god. In Medina the Koran becomes a vision statement of universal, eternal jihad. The Koran gives a rule, called abrogation, to resolve the problem. The later verse is stronger or better than the earlier verse. But, notice that the earlier verse is still true, because it came from the perfect Allah. Allah cannot ever be wrong.
To summarize:
| Mecca | Medina | |
| Jihad | No | Yes |
| Mohammed | Preacher | Politician/Warrior |
| Jews | Friendly | Annihilation |
| Koran | Peaceful | Violent |
The Polarities of Islam
Which is the true nature of Islam? Mecca and Medina contradict each other. One solution to this problem is to see Islam as a process and the Meccan phase is simply the first stage of development. This is true, but it does not explain how Meccan Islam does not go away, but co-exists with Medinan Islam.
The complete answer is that Koran is perfect in every way. So the peace of Mecca is just as true as the violence of Medina. In Western logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. But in Islam, both sides of the c0ntradiction are true at the same time. Hence, Islam is dualistic.
Is Islam peaceful? Yes.
Is Islam violent? Yes.
What is the true nature of Islam? It is peaceful and it is violent. It is peaceful when it needs to be and violent when it that is the best option.
Dualism is Islam’s greatest strength. It gives every apologist a reason to believe in peaceful Islam and every jihadist a basis to murder Kafirs (non-Muslims).
Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink https://politicalislam.com/a-picture-of-duality/
Copyright © 2011 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
The Dalai Lama said Sunday that “it’s totally wrong, unfair” to call Islam a violent religion. This is not the first time that the Dalai Lama has spoken up to say that Islam is not violent. Where does he get his information? He bases his statements on what his Muslim friends have told him.
For the Dalai Lama these Muslims represent the real Islam. They are not violent, and therefore, there is a peaceful Islam.
The Dalai Lama does not recognize the existence of a civilization called Islam. Islam has a highly detailed political doctrine that determines 100% of what a Muslim does to kafirs (kafirs is what the Koran calls unbelievers). This political doctrine includes what being “nice and moderate” to kafirs really means.
His opinions are of no consequence to Islam. Islam defines absolutely everything about a Muslim, down to how to say, “Hello”.
Start with the basics. All Muslims believe that there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet. Simple, but it demands that Muslims follow the Koran and the perfect pattern of Mohammed’s words and deeds (his Sunna). The Sunna is found in the Hadith (Traditions of Mohammed) and the Sira (Mohammed’s biography). Today, these three texts, the Trilogy, are available in readable editions.
The doctrine of political and religious Islam is contained in these three books. It is very simple–three books–a Trilogy. To know Islam, read the Koran, Sira and Hadith; don’t go and ask your Muslim friends.
This “peaceful Muslims = peaceful Islam” statements are actually about Muslim-ology, not Islam. It is perfectly fine to study Muslims, but do not draw conclusions about Islam from them. There is a cause and effect relationship that is confused. Islam causes Muslims. Muslims do not cause Islam. Muslim-ology teaches little about Islam.
This means that you judge Muslims by Islam, not Islam by Muslims. If you want to know anything about Islam read the Trilogy. If you want to know if someone is a moderate Muslim, use Islam to measure them, not personal opinion.
Islamic doctrine says that moderation consists of patterning your life after Mohammed’s perfect example and living by the Koran. By this standard of moderation, Osama bin Laden is a moderate Muslim. Osama follows the example of Mohammed, the warrior jihadist, and the later Medinan Koran. The Koran has two parts and the second part is about politics and jihad. A jihadist is a moderate Muslim.
But wait, what about those other moderate Muslims? They follow the Islam of the earlier Meccan Koran. So they are moderate too.
Islam is dualistic and has two different kinds of moderate. Here is the bad news. Islam is a process, not just a name. Both the Koran and the Sira, Mohammed’s life, show a process of starting off with civility, then demanding and next moving to violence as Islam grows stronger.
Mohammed preached the religion of Islam in Mecca for 13 years and gained 150 followers. He went to Medina and became a politician and warrior in jihad. In 10 years he conquered all of Arabia and died without an enemy left standing. Just as there are two Korans, there are two Mohammeds. Islam is dualistic in its nature.
Mohammed’s life was a dualistic process, an Islamic process of success. Those “moderate” Muslims represent the early stages of Islamification.
In Islam, doctrine matters, and doctrine is what the Dalai Lama doesn’t understand. What is his justification for ignoring it? Read his statements and comments. He never, ever, not even once, quotes any Islamic doctrine. He merely asserts that his Muslim friends have told him what Islam is. What if he asked different Muslims? He would get different answers.
The Dalai Lama is a hypocrite. In addressing Buddhism, he is very careful to quote doctrine and facts. When he talks about Islam, he just repeats what his Muslim friends say.
Here is the real tragedy. The Dalai Lama is not different from George Bush or any other politician. They know absolutely nothing about Islam, just what their Muslim “friends” tell them.
When will we have leaders who can talk from knowledge about the doctrine of Islam found in the Koran, Sira and Hadith? Hello Dalai, if you want to be a leader quote the Koran, the Sira and the Hadith, not your Muslim friends.
Bill Warner
Signup for our weekly newletter.
Copyright © 2008, CBSX, Inc. dba politicalislam.com
Use this as you will, just do not edit and give us credit.
Permalink: https://politicalislam.com/an-ethical-basis-for-war-against-political-islam-part-3/
Islam is based upon the principles of dualism and submission. However, you don’t have to be a Muslim to invoke them. Obama has closely aligned himself with Rev. Wright’s “Black Liberation Theology”, BLT.
The very basis of BLT is dualism. God is seen as being purely dualistic; a political creature who will support blacks and hurt whites. It is not the division into two categories that makes for dualism. A study of high blood pressure differences between blacks and whites is not dualism. Dualism, instead, divides and creates ethical and social asymmetries. As an example, Islam divides all humans into Muslim and kafir and posits that Muslims should rule over kafirs and that kafirs can be treated as sub-human if it will advance Islam.
As an example of dualism in BLT doctrine is that blacks are inherently the victims and whites are the oppressors. All criticism is for whites, blacks are innocent. When Don Imus made a remark about “nappy headed hos” he was fired. When rappers make far worse comments about killing whitey and cops, it is called socially conscious art. The lack of symmetry is obvious. Free speech does not allow criticism of minorities. This dualism is extended to where a Mohammed cartoon is hatred, but Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” is art.
Since Muslims are the best of people and follow a perfect doctrine, there is no need to even examine Islam, since, ipso facto, it is right. Therefore, all criticism of Islam is hate speech.
BLT holds that crime in the black neighborhoods is due to the CIA bringing in crack cocaine and the AIDS virus. Blacks are believed to have no responsibility. Blacks even temper criticism of rap hate-speech by saying that it the fault of the rich white record producers.
The parallel with Islam is exact. When Mohammed attacked the poor Meccan kafirs and killed them, it was the kafirs’ fault. They had opposed Islam and were guilty of the first offense. Any opposition to BLT is due to inherent bigotry on the part of the white critic, by definition. Therefore, the white man/kafir is due his fair share of abuse by the pious imam or BLT preacher.
Islam is always the victim. Being the victim is the perfect cover for crime and hate. Aggression and crime can be camouflaged as self-defense. BLT claims that when the white girl is raped by a black man, the crime is a form of revolution and represents justice. Over half of all crimes that blacks commit are against whites, but only 2.6% of white crimes are against blacks. When too many blacks are in prison or too many Muslims are terrorists, the statistics are merely proof of white/kafir bigotry.
One of the big ideas of Islam and the Left is that we need to pass “hate-speech” laws in this country as they have done in the EU. The dualism of hate speech laws is that they only apply to the majority, not the minority. Who gets to determine what is hate speech? The minority. Under EU hate speech laws, the Reverend of Racism, the Bishop of Bigotry, the Vicar of Victimology, the Mullah of Madness is the one who gets to judge what is and what is not hate speech. Then the government will take their case to court and prosecute the majority member offender, who must defend themselves using their own money. What a Brave New World it is.
What is tragic is that the attempts to cure dualism in our past, such as the Jim Crowe laws, were only further dualistic–affirmative action laws. But no form of dualism will ever bring justice. We must have only one set of laws that contain no bias for or against anyone. One law. One people.
Copyright © 2008, CBSX, Inc dba politicalislam.com
You may distribute this as you wish, please do not edit and give us credit.
Sharia Finance, Coming Soon to Your Hometown
A concise definition of Sharia finance.
Who is behind the concentrated effort to bring Sharia finance to the United States?
Everything you ever wanted to know (and more) about Sharia finance.
Duality and the Good Man
Dr. Steven Watts, Senior Research Fellow at the Global Institute for the Study of Culture, Economics, and Strategic Resource Management at Pepperdine University is one of several men making the rounds in America. Kuwait, Dubai, United Arab Emirates and Qatar are using various agents to soften up the kafirs on the subject of Sharia banking. The kafirs are getting Sharia-by-the-inch and Dr. Watts is one of those advancing it. He assures the audience that Sharia banking is good and even Christian, since it forbids investment in alcohol and gambling. His Christianity is part of his presentation.
Dr. Watts lets his audience know that he understands the Koran and Islam’s theology. He is certain that the good Islam is the right Islam and that the bad Islam of the jihadists is not the real Islam. He knows that his version is the right one because some imams have agreed with his reading of the Koran.
However, upon examination of his confident statements about his knowledge of Islam, he turns out to be no different from any other apologist. He displays no knowledge of the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) nor the Hadith (Mohammed’s Traditions). To hear him tell it, Islam is the Koran and has nothing to do with Mohammed. And even though he teaches about Sharia finance, he doesn’t about the complete Sharia. (Sharia law includes the subjugation of kafirs and women.) Dr. Watts knows a few “good” Koran verses that agree with his views and that is all he needs to know. The rest of it contradicts the “good” stuff, so it is “wrong.”
Dr. Watts is a good man who wants to see goodness in others. But his conclusions are due to his not understanding Islamic logic. If two things contradict each other, then one of them is false according to all the logic we are taught. If I tell you that I just fell in the swimming pool and I am completely dry, then something is wrong. My being dry contradicts getting wet from the water.
In Islam two contradictory ideas are both true. The Koran is built on the logic of the truth by contradiction. So when the jihad verses contradict the peace verses, both are correct. Why? Both came from Allah. Allah is never wrong by definition, so both sides of the contradiction are true.
Dr. Watts is trained in Western logical thought. His failure to see that Islam is peace and Islam is jihad is due to the fact that he can’t think in dualistic logic.
Islam is like a stick with a jihad end and a peace end. Islam is the entire stick. Dr. Watts and all of Islam’s apologists want to talk about the peace end of the stick and the nice Muslim who told them that the peace end of the stick is the real one. They deny the jihad end of the stick. Islam is both peace and jihad and they cannot be separated. The Koran teaches peace through jihad.
Dr. Watts also does not understand dualistic ethics. He sees the imam as a religious man. But the imam is a religious leader and a POLITICAL leader. He holds a dual role. The imam can say one thing to him and the opposite to the jihadist. Mohammed encouraged deception of the kafir. But to Watts, Islam is only a religion and an Islamic religious leader would never lie to him. The term political Islam has no meaning to him. He shows no understanding of Islam’s political/religious duality.
For the lack of understanding Islamic dualism, Dr. Watts happily goes about spreading the “good news” of Sharia finance. Thus another good man serves Islam as a dhimmi.
Permalink: https://politicalislam.com/duality-and-the-good-man/
Copyright © 2008 politicalislam.com
Use this as you will, just don’t edit and give us credit.
Since September 11 we have asked the question: “What is the real Islam?” The answers from Muslims and Westerners are contradictory and make us confused There is one way to gain clarity and surety about Islam–our best rational approach is the scientific method.
Let us start with the fact that the complete doctrine of Islam is found in three texts: Koran, the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and Hadith (stories and anecdotes about Mohammed)–the Islamic Trilogy. The Koran is confusing as it is arranged, but it can be made straightforward by scientific analysis.
The first step is to put the verses in the right time order, collect and categorize all of the similar stories. It is at this point that the missing parts, or holes, in the document become apparent. The life of Mohammed fills in and explains all the gaps and all the confusion falls away. Mohammed is the key to the Koran and Islam. The doctrine breaks down in time into Mohammed in Mecca (the early part) and Mohammed in Medina (the later part). In essence, there are two Korans, one written in Mecca and the second Koran written in Medina.
The two Korans are the first grand division of Islamic doctrine. What is intriguing is that the two Korans include contradictions. “You have your religion and I have mine” 109:1 is a far cry from “I shall cast terror in the hearts of the kafirs. Strike off their heads…” 8:12. The Koran gives a way to solve these contradictions–the later verse is “better” than the earlier verse. But the earlier verse is still true. All the verses from the Koran are true because they are the words of Allah.
The Koran defines an Islamic logic that is dualistic. Two things which contradict each other can both be true. In a unitary, scientific logic, if two things contradict each other, then at least one of them is false. Not so in dualistic logic. All of the doctrine refers to two classes of people–Muslims and non-Muslims, kafirs. The doctrine that applies to kafirs is political in nature and is rarely neutral or positive. The part of the doctrine that applies to Muslims is cultural, legal, and religious.
The second grand division of Islamic doctrine is into religious Islam and political Islam. It is surprising how much of the doctrine is political. Approximately 67% of the Meccan Koran and 51% of the Medinan Koran is political. About 75% of the Sira is about what was done to the kafir. Roughly 20% of the Hadith is about jihad, a political act.
Even the concept of Hell is political, not religious. There are 146 parts of the Koran that refer to Hell. Only 4% of the people in Islamic Hell are there for moral reasons, such as murder, theft or greed. In 96% of the cases the person is in Hell because they did not agree with Mohammed. This is a political charge. In short, Islamic Hell is primarily a political prison. In summary, Islam is an extremely political doctrine. It has to be. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 followers. Then in Medina, he turned to politics and jihad and became the first ruler of all Arabia. When he died, he did not have a single enemy left to speak or act against him, a very political result.
The Koran says in 14 verses that a Muslim is not and cannot be the friend of the kafir. This is pure dualism. The dualism of the Koran has no universal statements about humanity. The entire world is divided between Islam and the kafirs. The only statement about humanity as a whole is that all humanity must submit to Islam. Ethics are the membrane between religion and politics. Two sets of ethics are laid out in the Trilogy. One set is for Muslims and the other set is for the kafirs. Examples: a Muslim should not steal from another Muslim, a Muslim should not kill another Muslim, a Muslim should not cheat a Muslim.
The kafir can be treated in one of two ways. They can be treated well or they can be robbed, killed, or cheated if it advances Islam. On more than one occasion Mohammed said to deceive the kafir. Jihad as a political method killed, robbed and enslaved the kafirs. This is a dualistic ethical system. Islamic dualism is hidden by religion. The “good” verses of the Meccan Koran cover the verses of jihad in the Medinan Koran. Thus religious Islam shields political Islam from examination.
Scientific analysis shows us that there is a political Islam as well as a religious Islam. To argue about religion is fruitless, but we can talk about politics. We need to discuss political Islam, a system of ethical and political dualism.