Love for Life

THE NEW JIHAD: EXPLORING THE GLOBAL RESURGENCE OF MILITANT ISLAM
A book by Harrell Rhome, M.Div., Ph.D.
THE NEW JIHAD: EXPLORING THE GLOBAL RESURGENCE OF MILITANT ISLAM

[Note: Use above link to view a map of the Islamic Terrorist Network in America including the book]

Harrell Rhome is an investigative researcher and writer. He writes occasionally for newpapers and journals such as Journal of Cultural Review, Patriot Report, Eagle Newsletter, Wisconsin Report, Contact, Revisionist Observer, Freebooter Newsletter, several Internet web sites; additionally, Rhome is a Contributing Editor of The Barnes Review historical journal, speaking to their conference in 2002 on "Islam and Zionism: Two Natiionalistic Forces In Inevitable Conflict".

DUE TO NUMEROUS REQUESTS, THE ENTIRE TEXT OF THIS TIMELY BOOK ON ISLAM IS NOW AVAILABLE WITHOUT CHARGE.

Once you have read all or some of the book, we invite your comments. Click on the e-mail link at the very end of this web page, last button on the right.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword

One: Ignorance (Lack Of Knowledge) And Arrogance (Being Too Proud To Realize Or Care) Are A Dangerous And Deadly Duo

Two: Understanding “The Religion Of Peace And Submission” (Al-Islam) And Its Founder, Apostle And Prophet, Muhammad Ibn Abdullah

Three: The Koran (“The Recitation” Or “The Copy”) And The Hadiths (“The Traditions”)

Four: Who Is The Deity Called Allah?

Five: Islam And Other Religions

Six: The Major Divisions And Practices of Islam

Seven: Islam And Zionism: Opposing Forces, But With A Common Foe?

Eight: Islam And The Theology of Violence

Nine:Islam Versus The West: The Roots Of The Rage

Ten: Wahhabist Islam And The Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia: The Original Seedbed Of Islamic Extremism

Eleven: Responding to Islamic Issues

[The footnotes in the first version of the book have been converted to in-text references, and are set off in brackets, which seem to make for easier reading.]

FOREWORD

"Journalism is writing history while it is happening. The very act of reporting is crucial. News, if unreported, has no impact. It might as well not have happened at all."

This book contains historical and present-day facts as well as the author’s analysis and opinions. It is a broad overview, and should not be seen as an encyclopedic compendium. Every effort is made to provide documentation so that The New Jihad serves as a general reference and challenge for further study. Because of the controversial nature of the topic itself, it goes without saying that all readers may not agree. The book rightly begins with a controversy, one surrounding its name. What is jihad? Is it just a word meaning personal striving and struggling with life? Is it the life of a “suicide/homicide” bomber? Or is it ever so much more complex? Moreover, why is the truth on such matters so obscured? This book is a cultural, theological, and geopolitical commentary on the renascence and reshaping of Islam in the modern era, especially the manifestations of violence stemming from sects dedicated to militant, expansionist Islamist doctrines and concepts of history. The book is not an “attack” on Islam, Judaism, Christianity or any other religion, but it certainly can be characterized as “critical” and perhaps even “caustic”. My book is presented in the spirit of open debate unfettered by ideology. Every writer has a bias or two, and so do I, but I make little pretense of hiding mine. All the same, if I am accused of such things as “anti-this or anti-that” -- or perhaps “blasphemy” -- then I suppose that such words are not really all that surprising. If you don’t like controversy and challenge, if such disturbs your “ground of being”, then by all means, please stop here!

BUT -- if you truly disagree with my commentary and analysis, then dispense with my opinions altogether at any particular point in your reading – just focus on the data presented about Islam. And as to my sources --again, if you want, throw them all out! Get on the Web, go to a library and find completely different books and articles on Islam (the Internet and the press are full of them). On top of that, get whatever translations you want of the Koran and the Hadiths and the Islamist philosophers of yesterday and today – all the better, read them in Arabic if you can. You can find several versions set up with search engines on the www. But when you are complete, e-mail at Eagl...@aol.com (or at link provided at end of this web page) and tell me precisely where you differ as to the factual data (not the opinions) presented in this book about the religious faith and international cultural-political movement known as “The Religion of Submission” or if you prefer a slightly different translation, “The Religion of Peace”.

But please note! -- Any Fatwas should be forwarded to Salman Rushdie, as he has much more experience than I in dealing with such matters.

So climb aboard for the “ride”. Even though you may not like my “driving” at times, I promise a fascinating journey, with an outlandish cast of characters, and over some very exotic terrain.

CHAPTERS ONE THROUGH SIX: A SURVEY OF THE ISLAMIC RELIGION
CHAPTER ONE

IGNORANCE (LACK OF KNOWLEDGE) AND ARROGANCE (BEING TOO PROUD TO REALIZE OR CARE) ARE A DANGEROUS AND DEADLY DUO

ISLAM IS SUDDENLY A VERY “HOT” SUBJECT, AND…
34,000 AMERICANS HAVE CONVERTED TO ISLAM SINCE 9-11!

Try finding something at a book store or library. It will likely be harder than you think. Anything about Islam, especially copies of The Koran, are selling out fast, and libraries are swamped with requests for anything on the subject. Demand is at an all-time high in the wake of 9-11 Day. Some are trying to make sense out of what’s going on and trying to make sense of our rather dedicated enemies. On the other hand, reliable sources astoundingly report (WorldNetDaily) and several others; all cite Islamic sources) that since 9-11 Day, over 34,000 Americans have converted to Islam! This is an incredible figure, and far exceeds either the previous results or the wildest hopes of those who brought the desert religion of “The Submission” (Islam) to the Americas. Are these new converts all “foreigners”? No, they are not. Islam, with its egalitarian, internationalist sense of destiny and community, has believers from all races and backgrounds, including not only American blacks, but whites and even Hispanics as well. John Walker Lindh was not the first nor will he be the last “white Taliban” as others (including black Americans) have come before him and are in place right now. We should be concerned about this man, not because of his radical beliefs, but because of his treatment as an American citizen. While not our topic, it would seem that the Constitution no longer applies to him – or me or you. As the rather crude reactions to the existence of such as John Walker Lindh show, America is neither ready nor willing to confront this rather uncomfortable fact about the worldwide Islamic network – even moreover, its basic appeal to many and varied people. What is this all about? Why are Americans attracted to Islam? And what is this “religion of peace and submission to Allah” really all about?

There appears to be a vast disparity between the information and positions of “our” government and the facts of the matter. For instance, we are told that the 9-11 Attacks were “like Pearl Harbor,” but is this true? In most cases, the analogy is false, and fails to hold up to scrutiny. For instance, after Pearl Harbor, literally millions of American men lined up at recruiting offices to join any branch of the armed services that wanted them. Today, we have had an all volunteer military system for many years. But after 9-11, the statistics show that the recruitment levels have hardly changed at all. Americans are obviously not responding as they did over 60 years ago. Moreover, if 34,000 Americans had joined the German-American Bund or converted to Japanese Shinto, what would Americans of 1941 have thought about their country’s chances of overcoming the powers against them? Ask someone who was around in 1941 if this is not the case. The 9-11 Attacks have nothing to do with Pearl Harbor, and the reactions are completely different, but Americans seem reluctant to confront such an absolute falsehood and misrepresentation. It is one of the purposes of this book to dispel such obvious and blatant propaganda.

Consequently, this book is about some very uncomfortable questions – and some possibly equally uncomfortable answers – that we can no longer afford to ignore. It is essentially and intrinsically designed NOT to be just another “talking head” piece or cheap paperback rushed out for a quick buck. While I have only now brought any of it into print, I have been interested in Islam and Arabic history, as well as the history of Palestine, for a long time. I did not begin my research with a dislike for Islam as I admired its stand against global financial exploitation and unfair policies in Palestine, but as happens on many journeys, I encountered much more than I initially expected.

An assumption behind my writing is best expressed by that master manipulator, and America’s first “president for life”, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

“IN POLITICS, NOTHING EVER HAPPENS ACCIDENTALLY. IF SOMETHING OCCURS, YOU CAN BE SURE THAT IT WAS PLANNED THAT WAY.”

The basic goal, the raison d’etre, of my all my writing is to stimulate readers to think for themselves, but moreover, to think investigatively -- i.e., beneath the surface of current (and past) events. Nothing (or very little) is as it seems to be. Here again, I know I will be called a “conspiracy theorist”. Americans are particularly vulnerable -- due to the intentionally dumbed down “school system”, now quite well-entrenched -- to a psychological condition where they know little more than (and sometimes not even that) which is presented in our contrived and controlled “free media”. Observing from my former experiences as a psychologically-trained and licensed professional counselor, most Americans seem willing to blindly follow what they are told by “leaders” and “commentators”, even when this media culture often contradicts itself and blatantly errs in its “objective reporting”. Not only that, “objective opinion polls” say that the public gives an alleged 90% “approval rating” for George W. Bush, part, parcel, and product of the same family that gave us “Bush War One” in the Persian Gulf, yet another war which did nothing to solve (and actually increased) the regional problems and anti-American alienation. I maintain Sadaam Hussein is in power because the “leaders” of the Western World Order chose for him to remain in place. Why, exactly, I do not know, and while intriguing and well worth mentioning in passing, this is not the subject of my book.

WHO IS THE “ENEMY”?

We have, like dutiful “patriots”, waved our newly-purchased flags and decals, and lined up to enlist in the “war against terrorism”, often expressing our worst and most violent feelings, and yet we wonder why the rest of the world doesn’t see us as peaceful and beneficial – as we prefer to see ourselves. We truly “throw out the baby with the bathwater”. Suddenly, the complex and misunderstood new/old enemy is arrogantly dismissed in Bush Babble sound bites as “evil cowards” who “hate freedom” with “medieval minds”. In being obedient, good little “patriots”, we have dutifully lined up and followed our leaders into what may already be World War Three. In this “war on terrorism”, we have identified an “enemy”. GWB tells us “Islam is not our enemy”, but almost everything else we are told denies this.

Anyone with any small bit of perception quickly realizes that while all Muslims are not our enemy and are not terrorists, ALL terrorists now attacking us are Muslims. Not only that, they are also almost all Saudi Arabians or other Arabs from the Arabian Peninsula, but more on that later.

What is it about this severe and rigid desert faith that causes such a reaction against us? Why do they “hate” us? Is it just Islam’s imagination that they are and were already under assault from the West?

JUST PRECISELY WHAT IS BEING “LIBERATED” IN AFGHANISTAN?
THE BUSH FAMILY OIL VESTED INTERESTS IN CASPIAN REGION

Are we only there to bring freedom and democracy? Or is this merely another name for the Western World Order push for regional control and stability? The full utilization and transport of the “newly discovered” Caspian Sea oil reserves depend on a peaceful, Afghanistan. Look at a map. Resources from the region would go as much to the East as to the West, opening better access to rapidly growing energy markets. This would ultimately (perhaps very quickly) break the current OPEC control of the world markets. Furthermore, some sources say that Afghanistan itself sits on significant oil reserves. It has an already acknowledged vast reserve of natural gas. Whatever the case, the “war on terrorism” is not to “liberate” Afghanis -- or their women. Only the naïve and the mentally challenged would buy into such blatant “Bush-babble”. And if the reader has doubts that oil money and Bush family are virtual synonyms, please the still-unfolding Enron Scandal. There are numerous articles and Internet features on this aspect of the “war on terrorism”. One series of articles by Pepe Escobar from Asia Times newspaper is posted on Rense.com were called “Pipelinestan”. Without launching into a long and thus diverting subtopic, we will leave the reader to pursue the oil ties and how this determines crucial domestic and foreign policy decisions. When Muslims angrily say that the West oppresses and seeks to dominate their lands, in many ways, they are not far from the truth.

THEIR MINDS MAY BE “MEDIEVAL”, BUT THEY UNDERSTAND US MUCH, MUCH MORE THAN WE UNDERSTAND THEM: A LOOK AT ISLAMIC MEDIA

While the Western media have to acknowledge and tell you a little about the Arab TV giant, Al-Jazeera, you would think the limited coverage, that there is nothing else. This is, of course, a serious sin of omission; there is much more. In actuality, “they” really wish you knew nothing at all about any of these stations – my goodness, you might listen – and even worse, you might agree or hear something the “free” Western media didn’t cover.

One of the “other” Islamic news services is Al-Manar television (also newspaper; means “The Beacon”, “The Guide” or “The Usher”) and the website of its sponsor, Hesbollah. Al-Manar is quite a sophisticated operation, and knows well that it faces an even more ruthless and sophisticated enemy in the Israelis. And with few resources, technological or otherwise, Al-Manar became a major voice in the Islamic world, but because of its anti-Israeli stance and glorification of the on-going struggle, we hear little of it, facilitated by the fact the larger and better-funded Al-Jazeera has been the recipient of much inside information as well as having correspondents in the various hotspots, which Al-Manar does not (but it does have its sources). Nonetheless, we could do no better than to emulate Al-Manar, who clearly sees it as of paramount importance to comprehend the enemy. As I will say at numerous points in the book, the Islamic foes understand us far better than we understand them, “medieval” though they may be.

“In 1996, Al-Manar also began broadcasting in Hebrew, addressing Israeli soldiers and civilians and warning them of staying in South Lebanon. The Hebrew Observation Department monitors Israeli broadcasts and studies the Hebrew press online. Al-Manar has plans to launch a daily Hebrew news program. Hesbollah believes that to destroy one’s enemy, it is essential to understand that enemy first. … The more we know about them, the more we know their weak points. This makes it easier for us to confront them.” [Hassan Ezzieddine, Hesbollah Media Relations Director. Blanford, Nicholas, “Hesbollah Sharpens Weapons In Propaganda War,” Christian Science Monitor, 28 Dec. 2001.]

So Hesbollah has a “Hebrew Observation Department”; how interesting. And where is our “Islamic Observation Department”? Do we have one? Even now? And, no, it definitely does not seem to be the CIA. In essence, the entire American intel bunch have seemed (and still seem, like the whole administration) rather “clueless”. So what about the highly touted “free Western media”? While they did seem to have a few clues to what was going on, no one paid attention, and what’s more, editors and producers obviously decided not to go with the stories in a big way until after 9-11 Day, and even then, not very well. The fact is, quite sadly, that while all have not been entirely silent, practically no one – especially our leaders and media magnates – seemed to think that the beliefs and thinking of the terrorists was important. All we here are “Bush babble” sound bites: they are “evil”; they “hate our way of life”; they “hate freedom”. This hubris, this arrogance, this ignorance should now be unthinkable, but already, so soon after 9-11, e are slipping back into our old ways. Nevertheless, even though the government and the media are putting out little other than sound bites, some of us are still trying to “get the word out” about this enemy that has brought and already-ongoing war [for years; did you know that?] ever too close to home.

We could only hope that the “average American” (or Westerners in general) would be as savvy and informative as is much of the Islamic media, who very seriously pursue an analysis and understanding of the opposing cultural and political forces in the West. We, especially in North American, are still pretty ignorant about our now-designated enemies. So… since our multi-billion dollar media is not doing the job, and in hope of rectifying the situation (at least to some degree) -- and admitting inspiration from our “enemies” -- I offer this book as my version of your… “Islamic Observations Department.”

CHAPTER TWO

UNDERSTANDING “THE RELIGION OF PEACE AND SUBMISSION” (AL-ISLAM) AND ITS FOUNDER, APOSTLE AND PROPHET, MUHAMMAD IBN ABDULLAH

“ISLAM IS AS ISLAM DOES.”

“Instead of asking ourselves the pragmatic [and obvious] question, ‘How can we defeat terrorism?’ we should be asking ourselves the more basic question, ‘Is this the kind of situation we should let ourselves be maneuvered into?’ How did a country that was once determined to remain aloof from the endless conflicts of the Old World manage to get itself embroiled in, of all things, the medieval Crusades?

But the original Crusaders were at least fighting for something defined and definite: the Cross of Christ. They agreed that Christianity was right and Islam wrong.

President Bush would never say such an atavistic thing. He insists (in effect) that we are fighting for Islam itself, because terrorism is a ‘perversion’ of ‘true’ Islam, which is a ‘religion of peace’. In other words, this is a war for liberalism and tolerance, which Mr. Bush equates with ‘true’ Islam.

Such nonsense is too much for the distinguished Zionist scholar of Islam, Daniel Pipes, who reasonably asks by what authority a Texan Methodist can decide what is orthodox or heretical for Islam.

In a purely secular sense, ISLAM IS AS ISLAM DOES.”

Columnist Joseph Sobran
12 December 2001

DEFINING ISLAM

Most Americans greatly misperceive and misunderstand Islam, and neither the media nor the few carefully chosen Muslims who appear sporadically seem to shed much real insight. Most Americans either label it "a terrorist religion" or "a religion of world peace and brotherhood", but what are the facts?

Melissa K. Strecker, an American Islamic woman writes from San Jose CA to a number of newspapers, saying, "The word Islam is derived from the Arabic [root] word 'S_L_M' [salaam; same root as Hebrew shalom; the two languages are actually quite similar], which means among other things, peace, purity, submission and obedience. In the religious sense, the word Islam means submission to the will of God and obedience to His Law."

So that sounds OK, doesn't it? No evil or terrorism is present in what Maria wrote. She should know. Converts to any religion are often the most fervent and best-read among the faithful. This is a good point to add that "Mohammedanism" is a blasphemous term to Muslims ("those in submission" or if you prefer, “those at peace”; “Moslem” is not considered correct), and reminds them of Christianity, which blasphemously says a mere man is God, or so says Islam. Some 1.25+ billion people practice "the religion of peace and submission." Once almost all Muslims were Arabs, but today they constitute only about 10% of that number. Today, Indonesia is the largest Islamic nation.

Islam is a growing force in almost all parts of the world. While you have not heard it on your favorite network “news” broadcast, American Muslim sources tell us that over 34,000 Americans have converted to Islam since the 9-11 Assault.

WHO WAS MUHAMMAD? WAS HE TRULY “THE LAST AND GREATEST PROPHET” OR THE MOST SUCCESSFUL AND GREATEST RELIGIOUS ECLECTIC SYNTHESIZER TO EVER LIVE?

[While I know that some regard inquiries such as this as blasphemy, even if it comes from a non-Muslim. It will probably be disregarded by those who think like that, but blasphemy or disrespect is not my purpose. The basic aim of this chapter is at the essence of historical revisionism – that is, taking a new look (reviewing) the events of the past -- and its personalities.]

“It was the personality of Muhammad, his vision of truth gained through deep brooding and struggling of soul, that constituted him to founder of Islam. There can be no question of his sincerity at the beginning of his career, nor of the purity of his original motives; it is equally clear that he deteriorated in his later days, became at least a self-deceiver, fell into self-indulgent vices, and justified them with supposed visions and voices from heaven.” [Adeney, Walter F., The Greek And Eastern Churches (New York: Scribner’s, 1908, p. 162).]

As a matter of fact, when he was a proto-prophet, not quite fully into what was happening to him, Muhammad initially questioned the origin of the voices he heard, thinking that they might be jinni or demons. The man Muhammad ibn Abdullah (Ibn or bin Abdullah means “son of the Servant of Allah,” but supposedly Allah was not fully revealed until the coming of The Last Prophet. So who was the “Allah” that his father, Abdullah, served? Muhammad means "Praised"; how curious), was born into the pagan Arab Quraysh tribe near Mecca on the Arabian peninsula, and lived from c.560-570 to 632. His father’s name, Ibn Abdullah, means “servant of Allah,” but how could that be his name since the Allah of Islam had not yet been revealed? The answer to the riddle is that Muhammad’s father was a devotee of the moon god also called Allah or Al-Ilah, but more on this later. Young Muhammad’s early life was somewhat tragic. He never knew his father, who died before his birth. The Quraysh tribe was previously worshipped Allah, the moon god. His Uncle, Obied-Allah, and his mother, Aminah, were said to have been involved in mysticism and sorcery. [McClintock, John, and Strong, James, Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, 1981.] Because of her poverty and illness, in tribal tradition, the baby was given to a Bedouin shepherd and his family, where he spent his first six years with them in the severe desert environment. But soon after he was returned to his mother, she died, and the young prophet-to-be was raised by his grandfather and uncle. He knew all kinds of pagans, Christians and Jews, and was obviously influenced by all. As you will see, this was not the only early influence on this evidently dedicated and dynamic man who may be the greatest eclectic synthesizer of religious thought who ever lived. The Koran, the great revelation of the Archangel Gabriel to Muhammad, has no other witness (other than Allah and Gabriel) other than Muhammad himself. While one may raise similar questions as to the resurrection of Jesus, there were certainly many more than one person claiming to be witnesses to the events. In fact, the number of New Testament witnesses is estimated at about 5,000.

Muhammad wrote down the revelations somewhat randomly, and really wrote nothing else. At first, he thought he was beset with demons, but later decided that he was mistaken, and it was the Archangel Gabriel instead. The Hadiths, the traditions, are stories and reminiscences of the Prophet from those who were around him. It is, of course, considered blasphemous to even consider that those assembling the traditions, and those who later codified it, might have had some personal or ideological interest in its contents. More on this later.

ALTERNATIVE VIEWS OF AND QUESTIONS ABOUT MUHAMMAD’S LIFE

WAS HE AN ACTUAL PERSON OR LATER CONFABULATION?

Before moving on, we should briefly touch on two other topic in the interest of presenting a full range of alternative views. Some authors don’t think that the man, Muhammad, was even a real character, or at best, the stories that came to be known as his life were put together by followers much later after his death. “We find no references to him as a prophet until 150 years after his death. No one has ever found even the smallest fragment of the Qur'an from the 7th century. Thus much of what is said about the life of Muhammad must now be dismissed as fiction.” [How The Qur'an Came To Be by Robert A. Morey © 1996 Research and Education Foundation. For more information on Islam, write Faith Defenders PO Box 7447 Orange, CA 92863 www.faithdefenders.com]

WAS MUHAMMAD A BLACK MAN?

The other question is, was Muhammad a black man? While many Africans and some African-Americans believe the Prophet was black, this appears to be a story carefully planted by Arab mullahs, who emphasized the "African-ness" of Muhammad. In actuality, Vol. 2 of Hadith No. 122 says clearly calls him "this white man". Muhammad thought blacks were suitable for slavery. One story tells how he seized a slave freed by a Muslim, auctioning him off immediately for 800 dirhams! In spite of all this and much more, Muslims (especially in the Third World) still say that Islam supports black liberation and opposes slavery, and that he was a man of color. If you are ever discussing this, you might mention the following ayahs (verses) from Sura 3 of the Koran.

[3.106] On the day when (some) faces shall turn white and (some) faces shall turn black; then as to those whose faces turn black: Did you disbelieve after your believing? Taste therefore the chastisement because you disbelieved.
[3.107] And as to those whose faces turn white, they shall be in Allah's mercy; in it they shall-abide.

PRE-ISLAMIC RELIGION IN ARABIA:
MECCA AND THE KAABA ARE EARLY INFLUENCES ON MUHAMMAD

Muhammad's home town, Mecca was already a pagan "proto-one-world-religion" center, sacred to no less than five religions, including those worshiping Saturn or the Moon. In addition to the pagans, were resident Christians, Sephardic Jews, Judeo-Arabians, Christian and non-Christian Gnostics, and others. The Kaaba, an ancient, almost square stone structure, was already there. Nowadays, it is surrounded by the courtyard of the Grand Mosque. The word mosque is an Anglicization of masjid, or place of prostration for the ones who submit, i.e., Muslims. Said to have been built by Abraham, the Kaaba houses a black meteorite which is still venerated much like a Catholic statue or holy relic in spite of all the various Koranic prohibitions against idols. Apparently Muslim theologians or the faithful don't see it that way even though the main event of the Hajj is the circling of the Kaaba and kissing or touching the black stone, now no longer a pagan symbol, but now purified and imbued as a sign of Allah. Crowds estimated at more than one million have done this ritual march around the simple, black-draped cube, some dying in the crush of the crowd. Each Muslim is asked to make a Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca, at least once in life if possible. Emphasizing equality before Allah, all Hajjis wear a simple white garment. But as said, in early times, the Kaaba was the perfect model for a One-World Religion. In truly ecumenical spirit, it contained at least 360 idols from the world over, including a bust of the Virgin Mary with the Christ Child. In fact, the Virgin Mary is mentioned 30 times in the Koran, and Catholic writers point out that Muhammad’s scriptures have verses on the Annunciation, Visitation, and Nativity. [Pilote, Alain, “Mary and the Muslims,” Michael Journal, Jan./Feb. 02, 1101 Rue Principale, Rougement Quebec J0L 1M0 Canada.] Some Jews revered the Kaaba too, with a tradition that Moses and Aaron made pilgrimages there. A Judeo-Arab convert named Tobba put the first curtain over the building, much as it is today. When Muslims make their Hajj, the procession circles the Kaaba where each one kisses or touches the black stone. This is the central ritual of the pilgrimage experience. As a matter of fact, he really changed as little as possible of the old rituals and ceremonies.

“The Kaaba itself remained the focal point of the pilgrimage and the ritual of circumambulation, seven times around the great black stone, continued as in pagan times. So did the custom of drinking at the sacred Zamzam Well and the pacing seven times down the stretch where Hagar frantically wandered in search of water for Ishmael. Likewise the visit to the holy mountain on the Arafat plain, the throwing of twenty-one stones at pillars representing the evil spirits and the sacrifice of camels and sheep, were all adopted as Muslim rites.” [Nutting, Anthony, The Arabs (New York: Mentor, 1964, p. 35).]
Several good sources tell us exactly the same thing. “Islam's origins have been traced back by scholars to the ancient fertility religion of the worship of the moon god which was always the dominant religion of Arabia. The moon god was worshipped by praying toward Mecca several times a day, making an annual pilgrimage to the Kaaba which was a temple of the moon god, running around the Kaaba seven times, caressing an idol of a black stone set in the wall of the Kaaba, running between two hills, making animal sacrifices, gathering on Fridays for prayers, giving alms to the poor, etc.. These were pagan rites practiced by the Arabs long before Muhammad was born.” [http://www.templemount.org/missler.html, “Notes and References on Islam” by Chuck Missler26 Jan 02]
THE MISSION OF MUHAMMAD

Multi-cultural, polytheistic pre-Islamic Mecca had a great influence on the future prophet, who knew many faiths. He was 40 when beginning his religious, prophetic life. It was not an easy course. He attracted a few followers from his immediate family and clan, but aroused little other than anger among most he encountered. Sir Richard Burton, the 19th century explorer and Orientalist, said, "After a long course of meditation, fired with anger by the absurd fanaticism of the Jews, the superstitions of the Syrian and Arabian Christians, and the horrid idolatries of his unbelieving countrymen, ...he determined to reform those abuses.... He introduced himself as one inspired to a body of his relations and fellow-clansmen. The step a failure (except for converting Ali)." These religious/political struggles were quite fierce and bloody on all sides, hence, Muhammad had many opponents who wanted to kill him. In 622, he and his main followers were forced to flee from Mecca to Yathrib. While somewhat of an ignominious retreat, it did save his life, and the event became legendary. The date is commemorated as the Hegira, the Flight from Mecca to Yathrib, then renamed Medina, now the second greatest holy site. Islamic calendars note this as Year 1. He proclaimed Allah as the One God and himself as the last and greatest prophet, then returned to Mecca, where he cleansed the Kaaba of idols, and began the first Islamic state.

“Historians agree to say that there is a big difference between Muhammad’s personality in Mecca and his personality after his migration to Mecca. In Mecca, Muhammad was struggling to be accepted, so he tried to appeal to Christians and Jews as well, his teachings [then] condemning violence, injustice, and neglect of the poor. However when he moved to Medina, and his followers grew in strength and number, he no longer needed to please people of other faiths, and became a relentless warrior intent on spreading his religion by the sword.” [Pilote, Alain, “Mary and the Muslims,” Michael Journal, Jan./Feb. 02.]

Muhammad led his followers to military victory (and thus "conversion") of all surrounding tribes, massacring the Jews and Christians who dared refused in spite of the Koran. By 630, he had won all of Arabia. The Jihad for Allah continued after his death, threatening Europe from more than one direction. From North Africa they conquered Spain and Portugal, resulting in over 500 years of Islamic government on the Iberian peninsula. Islamic maps, by the way, commonly still show Spain and Portugal colored with the green denoting an Islamic state. From there, the Moors (mostly Arabs and Berbers) advanced across the Pyrenees into France, but were driven back. More than once, the Saracens (mostly Turks) came in from the East, assaulting the gates of Vienna. They were repulsed, but Turkey held on to much of the Balkans long enough to establish a strong Muslim presence, evidenced today by Bosnia, Albania, Kosovo and others tinderbox areas.

MUHAMMAD AND WOMEN

“Muhammad's Wives: (Sura 4:3 forbids more than 4 wives; Muhammad, however had 16 official wives, and 6 others as well.)
1. Khadija
2. Sawda
3. Aesah (8 or 9 years old)
4. Omm Salama
5. Hafsa
6. Zaynab (originally Jahsh's, Muhammad's adopted son's wife.)
7. Jowayriya
8. Omm Habiba
9. Safiya
10. Maymuna (of Hareth)
11. Fatima
12. Hend
13. Asma (of Saba)
14. Zaynab (of Khozayma)
15. Habla
16. Asma (of Noman)

Other wives:
17. Mary (the Coptic Christian; chose to remain a slave rather than convert.)
18. Rayhana
19. Omm Shank
20. Maymuna
21. Zaynab (a 3rd one)
22. Khawla.” [ From material by Chuck Missler.]

As we see, Muhammad had quite a large harem. In one story, he takes the wife of his adopted son and copulated with her when she was only nine years old! However, to be fair, we must not impose the responsibility for certain practices on Islam even thought they occur (not solely) in Islamic societies, e.g., female circumcision. This is a pre-Islamic practice that has simply continued as a part of dominating the submissive Islamic female. I know that many Islamic women will disagree, and I know that women (like Maria at the beginning) love and appreciate Islam and the status it gives (some) women (in some places). Nonetheless, while I abhor the "cultural models" that are imposed on western girls, Islam would not seem to be much of an improvement. Before closing the topic, let's also note that Maria is a modern Islamic woman in America. She would not lead the same kind of life in almost any declared Islamic state. She knows this, and values her religion anyway, hoping for positive changes, I am sure. I greatly respect people of this nature. It's just that I disagree with her answers.

There is much more to say about this fascinating character who said he was the Last and Greatest Prophet of a god he called Allah, but this is probably enough for our purposes.

CHAPTER THREE
THE KORAN (“THE RECITATION” or “THE COPY”) AND THE HADITHS (“THE TRADITIONS”)

[NOTE: Readers who have English Korans (also Qur'an and Quran) may find the verse numbering done differently. If you are truly serious about examining the Koran, go to the Radio Islam website, where they have a search engine that covers not one, but two different English translations. Just enter key words and phrases, and you will have your list of verses almost instantly. Hadith references are arguably more “violent” and “extreme” than the Koran, though the Hadiths, like many religious works, covers a plethora of topics.]

Is the Koran the pure uncorrupted word of God? Tradition and tales of the Prophet say that he received his “transmissions” from the Archangel Gabriel at various times when he would quickly write them down and toss them in a big box with others, hence only God or Gabriel would ever know which came first and so on. Most Christians are ignorant of the New Testament and how it was transmitted, but as most know, we have never had the original texts, only some early copies. But most Muslims will tell you that the Koran (the one in Arabic, which is the only “real” one) records the exact words spoken, hence its name, Koran. Is this true? See what you think. [My comments are in brackets.]

“By the way, it is no secret that the Qur’an itself has suffered from a multitude of textual variations. Again, Geisler and Saleeb point out: ‘If the divine authenticity of a book were to be based on the unanimous agreement among all the human-made copies of the original documents, the Qur’an itself will fail the test! Contrary to the opinion of many Muslims, we do not have the original copy of the Qur’an or even the uthmanic codex … the oldest text of the Qur’an still extant dates from the 2nd century after the Hegira [622 A.D., so c. 750 A.D. for the oldest ms.] and is compiled on vellum [as are early Christian mss.] in the early al-mail script [not the same as modern colloquial Arabic]. Other early Qur’ans are in Kufic script and date from the same time as well.’ The British historian, Sir Norman Anderson, relates to us that, ‘although it is true that today the Kufan text of Hafs is accepted almost everywhere in the Muslim world, the claim commonly made by Muslims that they have the ipissima verba of what Muhammad actually said, without any variant reading, rests upon an ignorance of the facts of history.’” [Answering Islam, 2000. Lifeforce@hotmail.com]

The Koran is said to have been dictated (over 20 years) by the Archangel Gabriel. Muhammad was ordered to listen and then repeat, hence "Koran" means "The Recitation." About the same size as the New Testament, it is organized in 114 suras or chapters. They are not arranged by subject or chronology, but by size, the shortest being first. Like verses from the Talmud, the Koran (perhaps intentionally?) contradicts itself, or if you prefer, like the duplicitous Talmud, "provides more than one interpretation." While there are incongruities in the materials collected and approved to be called "Bible canon", contradictions (and thus loopholes) are key features in both Sharia and Talmudic Law. It is impossible, therefore, without the help of a Mullah (means “judge”), Sunni Imam or a Cadi (Islamic law scholar and judge), to make sense of Sharia just as one cannot make sense of the Talmud without the help of Talmudic scholars and rabbis. Since there are major contradictions and variances on many topics, Sharia and Talmud mean only what the mullahs and rabbis say it means. I have long maintained that the entire "legal" concept of the "loophole" comes from the Talmud. Since Muhammad was heavily influenced by Jews, admiring them in the beginning, it is not surprising to find this legalistic, litigious likeness.

By 651-652, the canonical text of the Koran was settled. (Though some Shiites have an additional Sura). Other materials, legends, superstitions and stories are collected in a compendium called the Hadiths. While the Koran is in many languages, it is not considered genuine and worthy of veneration unless it is in Arabic or has the Arabic text to the side, as do some Jews with parallel Hebrew text. In the beginning, few thought that it had any meaning outside the Arabic cultural and linguistic paradigms. Like Christianity, it was only in its secondary phase that it manifested itself as a world religion. Studied intently by Muslims (often they study nothing else), it has become the basis for a now-international Islamic culture complete with legal and governmental guidelines.

In other words, the Koran is not only the guidebook for your life, but forms the constitution and law books of an Islamic state. All one needs is found there, and if you cannot decipher it yourself, the mullahs and tribunals will assist you.

HOW THE KORAN CAME TO BE

“Modern scholars using sound principles of literary analysis have determined that the Qur'an did not come from Muhammad. He did not recite it and actually never saw a copy of it. It was not put together in its present written form until nearly one hundred and fifty years after Muhammad's death. This has come as quite a shock to Muslims. According to the legends, myths, and stories found in the Hadiths, the Qur'an was written in heaven by Allah on a large stone tablet. The angel Gabriel brought it down and Muhammad recited it verbally but did not write any of it down. It was Muhammad's companions who wrote down what he recited. After his death, it was gathered together and compiled by the Caliph Uthman. The insurmountable problem that Muslims face is that they do not have any documentary evidence from the 7th and 8th century to back up any of their claims. For example, if Uthman compiled the Qur'an as the Hadiths claims (Bukhari I:63; IV:709: VI:507, 510), where is the manuscript evidence for this? Why have no Qur’ans survived from that period? Why do we have to wait over a hundred years before we find even a scrap of the Qur'an? … The Qur'an was invented in order to give spiritual unity to the vast empire created by Arab conquests. By borrowing liberally from the legends, myths and religious traditions of pagans, Jews, Christians, Hindus, and Persians, they created one religion to rule over all its citizens. Thus the Qur'an was the product of multiple authors from different times and places. These authors contributed stories and legends from their own cultural and religious background. The sources of these stories have been well documented by many scholars.” [How The Qur'an Came To Be by Robert A. Morey.]

THE KORAN ON ISLAMIC HOLY WAR

If jihad means only struggle or striving, and the Koran is a book of peace, then how does one explain certain verses that seem to belie such an assertion?

From The Koran. Sura/Chapter: Ayah/Verse [with comments in brackets].

2:190. Fight against those who fight against you in the way of Allah, but do not transgress, for Allah does not love transgressors. [This is the favorite verse of those Muslims who seek to disown extremist bin Ladenist Islam. Like Christianity in previous centuries, Islam too defined a code of acceptable warfare, but both were quite bloody and relentless in practice rather than theory.]
2:191. Kill them whenever you confront them and drive them out from where they drove you out. (For though killing is sinful) wrongful persecution is even worse than killing. Do not fight against them near the Holy Mosque unless they fight against you; but if they fight against you kill them, for that is the reward of such unbelievers. [So, if the enemy are unbelievers (USA), it is OK to strike out? I imagine this and the next are favorite jihadist verses.]
2:192. Then if they desist, know well that Allah is Ever-Forgiving, Most Compassionate.
2:193. Keep on fighting against them until mischief ends and the way prescribed by Allah prevails. But if they desist, then know that hostility is only against the wrong-doers.
2:194. The sacred month for the sacred month; sanctities should be respected alike ( by all concerned). Thus, if someone has attacked you, attack him just as he attacked you, and fear Allah and remain conscious that Allah is with those who guard against violating the bounds set by Him. [While the Imams and Mullahs said the USA should stop the Afghan campaign during Ramadan, it did not. Islamic armies have never really adhered to this, anyway.]

THE HADITHS (“THE TRADITIONS”)

“The Muslims are also guilty of circular reasoning when they document the Qur'an by the Hadiths and then document the Hadiths by the Qur'an! But there is no documentary evidence to back up the Hadiths or the Qur'an! They are both fraudulent as to authorship and dates.” [How The Qur'an Came To Be.]

The Hadiths are secondary in importance only to Koran. "Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight until you worship Allah alone...." (Vol. 4, No. 386). "No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel." (Vol. 4, No. 283; Vol. 9, No. 50). "Any Muslim who is killed while fighting in a Jihad will go straight to the sexual pleasures of Paradise." (Vol. 1, No. 35; Vol. 4, No. 386). The last one is what the Old Man of the Mountains, the original proto-type of Osama bin Laden, and his Hashish-eating “Assassins” (a word derived from "hashishin") believed back in the 15th century. Much of the violence and ugliness comes from the Hadiths. Hence, a Muslim can dissemble and misrepresent the facts, and tell you that none of it is found in the Koran. It's not, but it's in the Hadiths, which is also sacred. Furthermore, the Hadiths, like the Talmud, teaches that a Muslim may possess the property of the goyim/infidels through Jihad and oppression. As Muhammad said, "Whoever has killed and enemy and has proof of that, will possess his spoils." (Vol. 4, No. 370).

The Hadiths contains many other teachings and stories of Muhammad in addition to the "sacred" traditions cited above. Just as Jews tell you that they have no hate, directing you to the Torah and ignoring the spiteful Talmud, so Muslims will tell you that, according to the Koran, Islam is a civilized religion of peace and tolerance, usually ignoring Koranic texts to the contrary (there's probably another that contradicts it), but always avoiding the Hadiths altogether. Some of the few moderates and fewer liberals in Islam question that the Hadiths should be given (as it most often is) equal standing with the Koran itself, most Islamic scholars incorporate six other books of lesser collections of tradition (also called Hadiths) into the Sharia law code. As to the sensitivity of some of what we discuss, the following is illustrative.

“The historical significance of the Hadith collections is controversial. Conservative Muslims accept the Hadith books as accurate and reliable records of the Prophet’s sayings, actions, and approbations, arrived at by a careful scientific sifting of the good from the bad. Furthermore, there is an element of faith in their attitude toward the Hadiths which makes any question about its authenticity seem an attack upon Islam. Modern scholars, however, point to contradictions, anachronisms, and tendentious elements even in the Six Sound Books themselves and deny that the Hadith collections give reliable information about the Prophet. In their view the Hadith collections represent the consensus of the Muslim community on the great legal and theological questions of its history, all of which had been settled by the time the Six Sound Books were composed. The significance of the Hadith collections, therefore, lies in what they tell us of the Muslim mentality….” [Parrinder, pp. 482-483.]

“The burden of proof is now clearly on the Muslims. They must supply scholars with the documentary evidence to support their theories on the origins of the Qur'an and the Hadith. Until they do so, we cannot believe in the inspiration of either one.” [How The Qur’an Came To Be.]

JIHAD AND THE ISLAMIC INVASION
Looking At Holy War Through The Hadiths (The Traditions)

[Begin quoting.] The Hadiths reveals that Muhammad wanted his religion to be spread primarily by the sword. It is filled with commands to make war upon non-Muslims in order to force them to embrace Islam. Jihad was so important to Muhammad that he made it the second most important deed in Islam.

Allah’s Apostle was asked, “What is the best deed?” He replied, “To believe in Allah and his Apostle.” The questioner then asked, “What is the next?” He replied, “To participate in Jihad fighting in Allah’s cause.” (vol. 1, no. 25).

Anas bin Malik recorded that, Allah’s Apostle vanquished them by force and their warriors were killed; their children and women were taken as captives. Safiya was taken by Dihya Al-Kalbi and later she belonged to Allah’s Apostle who married her. (vol. 2, no. 68).

A brief summary of Muhammad’s teaching on Jihad should be informative to Westerners. The translator of the Hadiths, Dr. Muhammad Muhsin K’ban, wrote an introduction to the Hadiths which included a discourse on the subject of Jihad by Sheik Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Hamid, Sacred Mosque of Mecca, Saudi Arabia (vol. 1, pgs. Xxii-xi). This is the most frank Muslim discussion of Jihad we have ever read. It does not deny or play down Muhammad’s demand that Muslim’s must force Jews, Christians, and pagans to either embrace Islam or submit to political and financial suppression. Indeed, it tries to stimulate and motivate Muslims to engage in Jihad today. According to Sheik Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Hamid, Muhammad …commanded the Muslims to fight against all the pagans as well as against the people of the scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, until the pay the Jizya (a tax levied on the Jews and the Christians who do not embrace Islam) (p. xxiv).

Jihad thus employs several different methods:

1. There is the Jihad of the sword.
People are either to be converted or subdued through the violence of military force (vol. 1, p. xxii). Chapter 19 of the Hadiths speak of those who convert to Islam, by compulsion of fear of being killed (vol.1, p. 27). Muhammad said,
I have been ordered to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and the Muhammad is Allah’s Prophet, and offer prayers and give obligatory charity, so if they perform all that, then they save their lives and property. (vol. 1, no. 24).
This is why Muhammad warned the King of the Byzantines,
If you become a Muslim, you will be safe. (vol. 1, no. 6).
If the king did not convert, he and his kingdom would be destroyed and enslaved. The Hadith records how Mecca was conquered by force to Islam in vol. 1, no. 104. In vol. 3, no. 495, we read,
Allah made the Prophet wealthy through conquests.
When a Muslim murdered someone during a Jihad, he got to take the man’s property.
The Prophet said, “Whosever has killed an enemy and has proof of that, will possess his spoils.” (vol. 4, no. 370).
Thus is the driving force behind Muslim violence in Africa today. In such countries as Nigeria and Sudan, hundreds of thousands of Christians and pagans brutally slaughtered or enslaved in the name of Jihad because they would not convert to Islam.
Our Prophet, the Messenger of our Lord, has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah alone or give Jizya (vol. 4, no 386).

2. There is the Jihad of taxation.
Those who refuse to embrace Islam must pay a special tax called Al-Jizya (vol. 4, chap. 21, pgs. 251-252). This financial burden suppresses non-Muslims and makes their life as hard as possible.

3. There is the Jihad of financial reward.
In Iraq, a free university education has been offered to any Christian or Jew who will embrace Islam. They will also be paid $500 for any other blacks they convert to Islam. It has been quite common to tell Americans and Europeans that if they want to continue to work in the oil business in Saudi Arabia, they must convert to Islam. No church is allowed to be built on Saudi Soil in the attempt to suppress Christian worship.

4. There is the Jihad of fear.
The death penalty is applied to anyone who renounces Islam and embraces another religion such as Christianity. Currently, there are many Christians being tortured in prisons in Egypt and other Islamic countries whose only crime was to convert to Christianity.

5. There is the Jihad of slavery.
The only place in the world where black chattel slavery is practiced is in Muslim countries. “The London Economist”, along with many other magazines including our booklet, “Slavery In Islam”, reported that the Sudanese Muslims are presently capturing and then selling black women and children of the Dinka Christian Tribe for as little as $15 a head! Even the U.N. released a report on slavery that points out that the Muslims are still enslaving blacks. This has also been pointed out in special editions of “Newsweek” and other large magazines reporting on the reality of slavery in the Islamic world. Non-Muslim women who go to Saudi Arabia to work as maids are often enslaved by their Muslim employers, beaten, and raped at will. When the try to escape, the Saudi government will not let them leave the country, but returns them to their masters.

6. The Jihad of the courts.
Non-Muslims are denied equal access to and equal protection before the law because their testimony in court is not valid against a Muslim (vol. 3, chap. 31, pgs. 525-526). This applies even to murder!
No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel (vol. 4, no. 283; vol. 9, no. 50).

7. There is Jihad after death.
A Muslim is to fight on Muhammad’s behalf in his lifetime and after his death (vol. 1, chapter 43).

8. There is the Jihad of Paradise.
Any Muslim who is killed while fighting a Jihad will go straight to the sexual pleasures of Paradise (vol.1, no. 35; vol. 4, no. 386).

[The preceding (and some previous selections) is presented with thanks to and permission of Words Of The Spirit/ACMTC (HR 60 Box 11 Fence Lake NM 87315), an admittedly “biased” organization, with members on the front lines where Christians and Muslims are thrown together, such as Nigeria, where many lives have been lost in a true religious war almost totally ignored by the “mainstream media”. The author/compiler of this selection is a Muslim convert to Christianity, and for the sake of self and family, remains anonymous. While a donation to cover mailing is nice, Words Of The Spirit will be pleased to send additional materials, without obligation, to anyone who asks. While I don’t necessarily agree with every position, (a group that I totally agree with probably does not exist) their material on Islam is direct and informative.]

ISLAM, THE RELIGION TRUE TO SCIENCE?

This topic arises because this is one of the claims of Islam. Not all Muslims accept these claims, indeed, such points of argument are unacceptable among many of the Submissive Ones, who take the Koran literally as a object of faith. More educated and scholarly Muslims, however, do discuss such matters, and have put together an entire school of thought on the matter.
[For specifics in the Koran, see Scientific Errors In The Qur'an by Robert A. Morey, Research and Education Foundation,1996. Truth Seekers PO Box 250 Newport, PA 17074]

BUCAILLEISM: IS IT “ISLAM’S VERSION OF ‘CREATIONISM’
OR IS IT A SCHOLARLY SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH?

I am assuming that most non-Muslim readers have never heard of this, but it is a highly regarded school of thought within Islam. When the fundamentalist Madrassah or the broader-based Islamic university teaches about science, it is more often than not framed within the parameters of Bucailleism. In strict Islamic thinking (is there any other?), it is alright to study the scientists of the infidel West if the study is within the context of the Koran. Therefore, Bucailleism is a fundamental “scientific” underpinning to allow science to be taught as there is no conflict with the Koran. Going even further than that, Bucailleism maintains that the Koran predicted all the major scientific discoveries, such as the atom – well, you get the idea. The name is taken from a French writer and surgeon, Maurice Bucaille, who articulated the position in an influential 1976 book, widely known in the Islamic world. In many ways, this is the counterpart of fundamentalist Christian “Creationism.” Yet while Creationism denounces many scientific theories as lies, Buceilleism embraces science totally, saying that the Koran prophesied the Big Bang Theory and almost every other major scientific breakthrough. [For a much more extensive discussion, see Daniel Golden’s “Strange Bedfellows: Western Scholars Play key Role In Touting ‘Science’ In The Qur’an,” Wall Street Journal, 23 Jan. 02.] Many Western scholars were drawn into the debate, some under allegedly false pretenses. Dr. Joe Simpson, a Presbyterian physician-professor at Baylor University, who says his earlier works and articles were taken out of context. Yet when one researches the whole matter, we see that even though the good Presbyterian physician has withdrawn and repudiated many statements, that he is still touted as the “expert who agrees” throughout the entire Islamic world. The “Scientific Validity of the Koran” is used as a major conversion argument as well as providing answers for young Muslims with inquiring minds and who are drawn toward medical and scientific careers. This is no small enterprise in the global Islamic plan. Right in the heart of Mecca we find the Commission on Scientific Signs, funded by the Saudi royals and housed in an ornate building. A branch office is in Jeddah. One of the main missions of the Commission is the distribution of a videotape, This Is The Truth, which includes the whole pantheon of outlandish claims. For those Muslims who do not have access to television, the text has been published separately as A Brief Guide To Understanding Islam, including the “testimony” of many non-Islamic scientists. To say that the program is an “educational” success story, would probably understate its importance to the propagation of Islam.

CHAPTER FOUR
WHO IS THE DEITY CALLED ALLAH?

While always said to simply mean God, "Allah" is made from two Arabic words: "Al" (“al” means "the"; not the same as Al or AL) and "ilah" ("god"), used in the pre-Islamic Arabic transition from polytheism to "monolatry" or the worship of one supreme god out of many (same as Elohim, a plural), indicating that their tribal god was the supreme God. Besides, if you don't like the name, Allah, the Koran (again, like the Talmud) says there are 99 other names/attributes (I think the Talmud and Cabala may have even more than that), commemorated in the 99 beads of the Islamic rosary (taken from Catholics and Buddhists), the 100th and largest one representing Allah. Today, most people, Christian and not, will say that all "three great monotheistic faiths" worship "the same God", and want to join with them in prayer at public events. Again, there is a tendency to say much more here, but to put it simply: once one studies the Old Testament, New Testament, Talmud and Koran, most readers note a stark difference between the God of Jesus, the Christ, and that portrayed in modern-day Talmudism or Islam – or liberal Christianity. Another way this fallacy is expressed is "we all worship the same god", whether Hindus, Aum Shinrikyo, Voodoo, Pale Mayombe or whatever. The good old American "melting pot" idea is misapplied in this instance. Serious Jews don't believe it for a minute, and serious Christians know that Christ Immanuel is One with God; that He is God. But, today's "Judeo-Christians" and New Agers have no theological or doctrinal problems with any of this. It's the "experience" of God or the "spirit" of Jesus' "and praying and meditating as brothers and sisters" that counts, which all begs the basic question of is it all the "same God"?

The combined words of al and ilah combined to form “Allah", from the same Semitic root word for a supreme deity, "EL" or "AL", an early name for God (or gods as in the polytheistic Hebrew plural , "Elohim", as in the Old Testament). The "EL" root is used in names such as Isra-el, Gabri-el, etc. EL/AL is God/god perhaps through a different line of tradition than the one ending up as Y_H_W_H; naturally, scholars vary on this. More than a few religious scholars and archeologists believe that "Allah" may be the continuation in another form of an old pagan moon god, also called similarly called Allah or Al-Ilah (the greatest of all gods), one of 360 idols in the Kaaba. If we accept this as fact, which it certainly appears to be, then this Allah/Al-Ilah has no connection at all with the EL/ELOHIM of the Old testament. The Prophet cleansed the Kaaba, expelling all the idols, yet the crescent (hilal) moon remains as the most enduring and visible symbol of Islam, and the Islamic Calendar (which begins with the Hegira in 622) is based on a lunar year. Please be advised that this is a very touchy subject in Islam, which may be the most easily offended religion on earth. To publish this in most Muslim countries would bring serious charges of blasphemy. But all this aside, see what you think.

WAS “ALLAH” A MOON GOD?

Or to put it differently and (perhaps) more kindly, was a pagan god(s) possibly a precursor of the theistic construct now know as Allah? Asking the question in this way is (perhaps) kinder, in that it assumes that Muslims are acting in good faith, and not knowingly worshiping a “moon god”. But we already know that Muhammad was an eclectic synthesizer, so did he bring in pagan gods (or memories and vestiges of their tradition) into his religious stewpot? While devoutly claiming to be of the original Abrahamic monotheistic line, one must remember Muhammad’s eclectic genius of blending traditions and stories of the old Middle East together. To accept the moon god origin hypothesis, one can see how the Great Reformer chose only the best parts. This would have (and did in other areas) included existing worship and rituals and dates just as the Christians did with Christmas, Yule, Saturnalia, and the like in the early times of that other eclectic, synthesizing faith. Was one deity chosen among others to incorporate because its cult was so powerful and ubiquitous? Some Arabs of the day already practiced a paganism broadly called “monalatry” (worship of one god, but out of many; one is the supreme deity). Monalatry is a transition from polytheism (worship of many gods) to monotheism (just One God). If, then, we assume monalatry as a part of the cultural mix, then the evolution of Muhammad’s theological thought would have included this concept of one supreme god out of many. He would have known of the moon god cult and how important it was to win over this powerful group. With this in mind as background, we continue to explore the possibilities. He must have appealed initially to the Arabs not as one introducing a new deity, but a new way of understanding the god.

“The Bedouin were … animists, for they believed in a number of powers, spirits, and demons whom they propitiated…. [They] were also influenced by the astral religion of the ancient Semitic peoples, which led them to recognize deities associated with heavenly bodies. The major figures were goddesses, of whom the most important were al-Lat, al-Uzzah, and al-Manat. A superior deity called Allah [al-Ilah, the one greatest god of all gods] was also familiar to them, but his function was vague, and he did not figure strongly in their thinking or practice. Nonetheless, this deity was already known to the Arabs, and Muhammad’s proclamation of his unique power did not involve the introduction of a wholly new deity. The Arabs also made pilgrimages to shrines located at different places in the peninsula. There was a shrine to al-Manat at Ukaz, not far to the north of Mecca….” [Parrinder, Geoffrey, Ed., World Religions: From Ancient History to the Present (Bicester, UK: 1971, pp. 464-465).] “Archeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. … The pagan Arabs worshipped the Moon-god Allah by praying toward Mecca several times a day; making a pilgrimage to Mecca; running around the temple of the Moon-god called the Kaaba; kissing the black stone; killing an animal in sacrifice to the Moon-god; throwing stones at the devil; fasting for the month which begins and ends with the crescent moon; giving alms to the poor, etc. … The Muslim's claim that Allah is the God of the Bible and that Islam arose from the religion of the prophets and apostles is refuted by solid, overwhelming archeological evidence. Islam is nothing more than a revival of the ancient Moon-god cult. It has taken the symbols, the rites, the ceremonies, and even the name of its god from the ancient pagan religion of the Moon-god. As such, it is sheer idolatry and must be rejected by all those who follow the Torah and Gospel.” [Yeshua Communications Network. http://www.yeshua.co.uk.]

Dr. Robert Morey speaks plainly on the matter in his book The Islamic Invasion saying: "Islam's origins have been traced back by scholars to the ancient fertility religion of the worship of the moon god which was always the dominant religion of Arabia. The moon god was worshipped by praying toward Mecca several times a day, making an annual pilgrimage to the Kabah which was a temple of the moon god, running around the Kabah seven times, caressing an idol of a black stone set in the wall of the Kabah, running between two hills, making animal sacrifices, gathering on Fridays for prayers, giving alms to the poor, etc. These were pagan rites practiced by the Arabs long before Muhammad was born."

This "Allah" or "Al-Ilah" was a moon god (or pair of moon gods), and was a part of the pantheon of the Kaaba. Furthermore, the crescent (hilal) moon is the ubiquitous symbol of the Faith of Submission, and its calendar is based on a lunar year. But can such a connection really be proved? Anyone who has ever read more than one book or two on the archeology and the history of the Holy Land knows that this is very confusing. The entire archeological process is politicized, and has been for centuries. All Islamic explorers are just that – Islamic. Almost every Jewish digger, and many “Christians” as well, are Zionists, and if not that, devoted to proving the “truth of the Bible”, generally meaning their particular theological slant via their favorite translation. It is true: great things have been found, and more will surface. It’s just that there are few who can agree on exactly what has been found, not to mention arguing heatedly about dating the objects. For instance, some maintain there was either no David, or that David and his kingdom was nothing but a local tribal chief. Then others will tell you that this was one of the greatest powers of the day. Maddeningly, both sides are amply armed with archeological “evidence”. In addition to the very solid reference previously quoted, I also present the following.

“In the 1950s, archeology disproved the Muslim faith. A major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazor in Palestine. This important discovery of science is recorded in numerous archeological journals. The facts cannot be denied. Two idols of the Moon-god Allah were found, proving that the ‘Allah’ which Muslims around the world worship as the only true God was a pre-Islamic deity! Photos at the dig site, show Allah sitting on a throne with the crescent moon, the symbol of the Islamic faith, carved on his chest. Yet these moon-god statues were made long before the Islamic faith was founded.” [Bloody Islam, ACMTC, 2000. For free info. on Christianity and Islam, write “Words Of The Spirits” HR 60 Box 11 Fence Lake NM 87315]

Thus, the pagan Arabs were converted rapidly. They did not have to give up their real god, the greatest god (al-ilah); they merely had to forget about his daughters and consorts.

SOME MUSLIMS KNOW THE TRUTH

THE REAL HISTORY OF THE CRESCENT AND STAR, THE PRINCIPAL SYMBOL OF ISLAM

It is not to say that all Muslims are unaware of the derivation of the most potent and enduring symbol of Islam.
“The crescent moon and star symbol actually pre-dates Islam by several thousand years. Information on the origins of the symbol are difficult to ascertain, but most sources agree that these ancient celestial symbols were in use by the peoples of Central Asia and Siberia in their worship of sun, moon, and sky gods. There are also reports that the crescent moon and star were used to represent the Carthaginian goddess Tanit (Tanith) or the Greek goddess Diana.

The city of Byzantium (later known as Constantinople and Istanbul) adopted the crescent moon symbol. According to some reports, they chose it in honor of the goddess Diana. Others indicate that it dates back to a battle in which the Romans defeated the Goths on the first day of a lunar month. In any event, the crescent moon was featured on the city's flag even before the birth of Christ.

The early Muslim community did not really have a symbol. During the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Islamic armies and caravans flew simple solid-colored flags (generally black, green, or white) for identification purposes. In later generations, the Muslim leaders continued to use a simple black, white, or green flag with no markings, writing, or symbolism on it.

It wasn't until the Ottoman Empire that the crescent moon and star became affiliated with the Muslim world. When the Turks conquered Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453, they adopted the city's existing flag and symbol. Legend holds that the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Osman, had a dream in which the crescent moon stretched from one end of the earth to the other. Taking this as a good omen, he chose to keep the crescent and make it the symbol of his dynasty. There is speculation that the five points on the star represent the “Five Pillars of Islam”, but this is pure conjecture. The five points were not standard on the Ottoman flags, and as you will see on the following page, it is still not standard on flags used in the Muslim world today. For hundreds of years, the Ottoman Empire ruled over the Muslim world. After centuries of battle with Christian Europe, it is understandable how the symbols of this empire became linked in people's minds with the faith of Islam as a whole. Based on this history, many Muslims reject using the crescent moon as a symbol of Islam. The faith of Islam has historically had no symbol, and many refuse to accept what is essentially an ancient pagan icon. It is certainly not in uniform use among Muslims.” [From Islam Newsletter on About.com. While some Muslims do recognize and discuss that the crescent and star are pagan symbols and are thus not appropriate for Islam, the religion really has no other symbol to compete with the hexagon of the Jews and the tau/cross of the Christians.] Other traditions hold that the crescent and star symbol were chosen by Muhammad when he had his first revelation from Allah in June of 610. When he looked up to the heavens, he saw the Moon and the planet Venus in conjunction, and so were chosen as the symbol of Islam and the first Mujahadeen. While this indeed may have been the astral configuration in June of 610, one can hardly overlook the convenience of this “new” tradition blending on and incorporating the already existing use of the now ubiquitous symbol.

The whole idea of the moon-god hypothesis is quite threatening to Islam, and especially so to the better-educated and scholarly Mullahs and Imams (like most of those in the West) who must know the truth. One must also remember that university educations are provided essentially for free in some Islamic states, such as Saudi Arabia. The most popular major? Islamic studies. Do they hear of such things? They must, but are provided with plenty of rationalizations by their teachers so that, if successful of purging their mind of such questions, can merely ignore them as infidel propaganda. This, however, is quite another matter as to sharing this truth with the average believer among the Submissive Ones (Muslims). Their clerical/legal power-hold over the Islamic masses all around the world lies in their claims to complete purity of doctrine.

THE SAME GOD?

Is Allah the same God as the YHWH or EL of the old Hebrews such as Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Is Allah the same God whom the New Testament tells us is the Father of Jesus Immanuel, the Anointed One? Without getting into a long doctrinal and theological discourse, one thing that seems to be missing is the concept of God’s love. Islam (like Talmudist Judaism) is a religion of rules and law. While the concept of “the same God” has some necessary usages as we interact with others in everyday life, and in certain kinds of non-denominational ministries. Indeed, to share our faith with another, ultimately we must discuss who God is and how God acts in the world, and such exchange of ideas begins with basic concepts, focusing initially on likenesses rather than differences. Does God really care? Each person must decide, but each person should be aware of the facts, not just what some intellectual-theological idealistic dreamer has constructed to gull the masses with the idea of a One-World Religion.

For those who adhere to any sort of traditional Christianity there is a problem with the big, all-encompassing universalistic One-God called Allah. Almost all Christians believe in the Trinity, a triune manifestation of the godhead. Absolutely not a trace of this is found in Islam. Yet most Bible translations render “God” as “Allah”; better to recruit converts, I suppose. My guess is that most Christian sermons of late try to illustrate that “good, American Muslims” (at least) worship the same God as the rest of us. While I don’t think any preacher of any kind, Christian, Judaic, or Islamic, ought to continually preach a message of hate toward other religions (as is the case in much of Islam), a little bit of the truth every once in a while is not too much to ask. Make an inquiry of your pastor. What does he/she know of the real origins of Allah? It’s not that hard to find, you know?

CHAPTER FIVE
ISLAM AND OTHER RELIGIONS

The following is a brief foray into the very specialized and fascinating field of comparative religions. As such, it can only survey major theories and themes, and cannot go into great detail on each and every one. But with the references I have provided, any more curious readers may go to a library and/or Internet Search Engine for a wealth of additional material on these and the other related topics.

ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY

“[in the Koran] …all religions but that of Islam are treated with contempt. As a consequence, cruelty to the unbeliever and especially the apostate – that is to say the convert of Christianity – has been frequently permitted, and that with ruthless fanaticism.” [Adeney, p. 163.]

The Koran says Jesus (Issa in Arabic) was a great (but not the last) prophet, and (unlike some modern Christians) says that He was born of a virgin. He is not, however, seen as divine, hence the basic Christian claim is offensive and blasphemous to those In Submission. Some Jesus miracle stories are repeated, but Muhammad's marvels always seem to top them, emphasizing his prophetic seniority over the Judean, Issa. Islam not only came to reform, but to replace Judaism and Christianity, both of whom he accused of corruption, and of altering or adulterating their sacred writings. By the 2nd century A.D., Christianity was flourishing all over the Middle East. The Nestorians even went to China, and a strong Chaldean Church thrived in Persia and Iraq. There were many Arab Christians in North Africa. Early versions of the Bible, as well as some important, non-canonical ancient Christian writings, were in Arabic. Many writers point out that Christianity had dulled into a superstitious slumber in Africa by 700 A.D. But whatever the case, by the second and third generation after Muhammad, all these communities (and many not cited) fell militarily to Islamic forces after more than 500 years of deep roots. The Christians of Constantinople, many who were rich and powerful, packed into the great Hagia Sophia Cathedral when the Muslim Jihad entered the city in 1453. Along with their Patriarch and his bishops, they thought they would be spared. They were not. Uncounted tens of thousands were killed, and blood ran knee deep in the floors of the huge building. The Church of the Holy Wisdom (Hagia Sofia) was cleansed of the blood and all Christian profane items, and became a mosque as it is today, an ancient Christian Constantinople, "the Second Rome", was so devastated and depopulated that it took centuries to truly recover.

“[The Christians in Hagia Sofia] were caught in a trap. … The old people were killed on the spot; the young men and women were led off in strings of captives for a worse fate. “ [Adeney, p. 271.]

I have recounted nothing about the earlier Christian Crusades, but most everyone knows that few military campaigns, then or now, exceed their brutality. Neither religion was a religion of peace; both used the sword freely. Emasculated modern Christianity has lost its warrior spirit. Islam, however, has not. Nonetheless, after the rise of Islam after the passing of Muhammad, Christianity virtually ceased to exist in North Africa and the orient except in enclaves like the Copts of Egypt and Ethiopia, and a few in the mountains of Iraq. Several Orthodox Patriarchs still sit in Istanbul, Damascus Iraq and Beirut, etc., but where they were once the spiritual leaders of millions, their congregations today are a mere shadow of their former pre-Islamic glory. Most (but not all) Islamic states tolerate Christians, but does not allow them to proselyte or publicly talk about their faith. In severe Islamic states such as 1970s Iran, and in the newer Taliban movement, it could mean death. Christianity is seen as a blasphemous (saying a man is God) and idolatrous cult, at best to be tolerated and confined (and taxed), but not allowed to expand. Nothing of the Trinity recognized; Islam is Unitarian; God/Allah is One. Christian art works like paintings and statues in Catholic churches and the icons of the Orthodox are seen as idols. The Koran allows no portrayals of human or animal form, hence there is no true Islamic art other than abstract drawings and geometric designs. While Sufism and other mystical, aesthetic beliefs widen their traditions a bit, Islam is primarily an ascetic, desert faith, closer in temperament to the Anchorite, Stylite desert Christians monks (who preceded them) than to the worldly modern "Christians" of today.

Some American Muslims , as have all other faiths, have "adapted" to our hyper-culture and to the "modern" world. Even "fundamentalists" such as the Saudi royals of the Wahhabi sect can be enticed by the satanic delights of the west via western money. It is these "adaptations" that spurred the modern Islamic World Revolution. So far, the moderates are losing, and "liberals" exist no where except as carefully tended "hothouse flowers" in the west.

Historic Christianity can have courteous, mutually respectful relations with Islam, but when theology and doctrines are placed on the table and examined , there is really very little room for either side to agree on much of anything. In spite of the ugliness of Islam toward Christians, Vatican II Pope John Paul II goes to Iraq and kisses a Koran! Oh well, he had already acknowledged Judaism as a "brother", so why not Islam as well?

So then, Judeo-Christians and Judeo-Catholics can pray all they want with a few carefully selected "moderate" Imams such as those hauled out for the media lens in recent "national prayer." While we can be civil and respectful with one another as religions sharing the world, as do nation-states through diplomacy, the theological issues are clear. Either Christ Jesus Immanuel is correct or Muhammad is correct. There is little middle ground. Certainly not many "Christian pastors" ever told you any of this, so call one up and see what he/she might have to say on the matter. I welcome dialog and comments.

SOME COMMON ISLAMIC STRATEGIES AND THEOLOGICAL ARGUMENTS OFTEN EMPLOYED FOR THE CONVERSION OF CHRISTIANS AND JEWS

Conversion is an on-going process. It is largely on a one-on-one or small group basis. While there may be some, I could find no reference to media advertising to promote Islam other than on the Internet. The following strategies are gleaned from Christians and Jews who have had contact with Muslims and talked about Islam with them. More often than not, one would hear the following persuasive arguments, especially persuasive to someone with an inadequate understanding of their own faith. This category includes most who call themselves Christians, and who know little enough about the history of their own chosen faith, much less know anything at all about Islam. We can be quite sure that Americans such as John Walker Lindh heard and accepted all these arguments. Shortly after you started reading the book, I presented the astounding figure that over 34,000 Americans had converted to Islam in the three or four months following the 9-11 Attack. I could never find a source that gave any kind of ethnic breakdown, but it would be almost impossible to think that the band of new Muslims includes not only Middle Easterners and black Americans, but white and Hispanic Americans– and many others as well. If you get a chance to talk to one – which I recommend – see how many of the following arguments present themselves as you progress in your dialogue. I am betting that they all do. And of course, I am interested in expanding the list as I am sure that even more creative arguments are used, especially by those well-versed in Islam. But if you talk to a new convert, this should be precisely what you will hear from them when you eventually ask exactly why they converted.

1. Islam is the righteous religion. Jews never believe in Jesus or Muhammad or in the Bible or the Koran. Christians never believe in Muhammad or the Koran, and think that the Old Testament can’t stand alone without the New Testament. Islam is not like them. We believe in Moses and his Law and also in Jesus and his Injil (Bible). Muhammad completed the message of both of them. So if you accepted Islam, you will be a believer in all the prophets and in all of their books.

2. Our book, the Koran, is a complimentary book. The Bible is deficient in some important conditions that manage the daily life of believers. It is concerned only with the spiritual things. Torah, on the contrary, is only concerned with the daily duties and neglects the eschatological issues. But Islam is concerned with both of them.

3. If you believe in Islam, you would lose nothing, only a few regulations will be added to your lifestyle. We have many things in common. We believe in one God like you, believe in angels, prophets, holy books, prayer and fasting as a way to God. We believe in life after death and in resurrection at the end of times. We believe in the paradise and hell. So a lot of things are common between Islam and older versions of religions. We complete what is deficient in them.

4. If you believed in Islam, you will need nothing to be saved. Our religion is simple. You can do everything after you utter the two witnesses and pray five times a day, and fast for a month every year. After that, you can work, marry, and enjoy your life and all your sins will be easily forgiven. After death you will be a member in the paradise.

5. Islam is the religion God likes. God sent the Koran after all previous prophets failed to satisfy the needs of humanity. So He sent the Koran to fill the empty spaces in the previous books and no more books will be inspired till the day of judgment.

6. Islam is the religion of equality, freedom and human rights because all Muslims (notice it does not say all people) are equal in front of God. The prophet Muhammad is the prophet of peace, mercy and truth. Islam respects the weakness of our human nature, so it doesn’t impose overzealous duties on believers. So they can be easily saved. [Basic material taken from “The Masks of Islam,” in Battle Cry Sounding, # 159, 2002, prophet@hubwest.com.]

Well, now – are you ready to enroll and receive all these benefits? I suppose that’s rather doubtful if you’ve come this far with me in the book, but as important than your own conversion is that of those around you. Young “Johnny Taliban” was only 16 when he fell in love with the Saving Faith. But more than all of that – and I address this to Christians of all varieties – can you answer these very persuasive arguments? Think about this. I did not ask you if you believed these statements. I asked if you could answer them. Or do you know someone who could help you? Do you have a pastor (rabbi, spiritual guide, guru, psychic, etc.) who can answer them for you? Christianity, as it is constituted here at the beginning of the 21st century, seems ill equipped ideologically to face the challenge. The average Muslim seems more dedicated and devout in his or her faith than do “modern” Christians. After all, other than multi-cultural one-worldism and “brotherhood” or some form of “fundamentalism” or religious emotionalism – all of which are intellectually confined within the parameters of denominational sectarianism -- what do most churches offer today? Not to divert too far, but did you know that the word translated as “church” in the New Testament is ecclesia, and that it simply meant a like-minded cultural-religious covenant community rather than the monolithic entities we have today?

As to the conversion points employed by Islam: Muslims make no real secret of hiding their intent. No one is being “brainwashed” or “hooked in” unless they choose to be. Right now, Islam in North America has no reason to worry about forcibly converting or “brainwashing” anyone. Apparently, interest in Islam – and not just interest in the topic, but interest in conversion – is at an all-time high according to every source I could find. There are smiles on the bright faces of both young and older Muslims who welcome those who seek to submit to the Religion of Peace and Salvation, a faith in which they are secure and happy, in spite of what we are told. Are you secure enough with your own faith, whatever it may be, to both confront and answer these questions? Do you even know where to look for the answers? Some questions can only be truly and meaningfully answered inside oneself, a process that must come long before sharing one’s faith and beliefs meaningfully with others.

The situation is no longer just a culture war. 9-11 changed all of that, but there is no way that Islam can win a traditional war with the West, and besides, that’s not the kind of wars we fight nowadays anyway. We have arrived in the dimension of “stars wars” military science fiction come true. We can now kill people all over the world – sometimes even the right ones – with the touch of a button. With Predator Drones and even more sophisticated unmanned aircraft soon and sure to come, we need not endanger the lives of a pilot or crew. If American or Western lives are lost, it is through “friendly fire” accidents. Subsequently, the conflicts are bloodlessly and antiseptically presented by our “fair and balanced” media, and almost everyone goes, “ho hum, pass my the chips and beer,” and pays little attention. Even after 9-11, we have resumed our usual slothful inattentive ways. But, the point is that although radical militant Islam can inflict a lot of damage, ultimately, it will be defeated. It is then reasonable for “mainline” Islamic thinkers to work on finding another way to pursue the basic issues, but that presupposes that anyone has really agreed upon what these issues are. Again, it is not my responsibility to tell Islam precisely how to respond, only to suggest that what they are doing at present will ultimately fail. If there was ever a time for true Islamic Unity, it is today against the forces technologically superior forces of the New World Order. These very real forces directly confront Islam on all cultural and economic fronts. Among other things, Islam has the audacity to operate a banking system without usury. [This is a fascinating topic that deserves much more attention. This is an area where Islam could contribute a useful model for economies that want to exit from the International Banking and Trade Cartel. While most Islamic banks are forced to do business with the usury banks, the model itself is still pure and potentially useful for patriots and nationalists in every nation of the world. ]

Hey, Muslims – you got our attention 9-11 – what will you do with it now?

ISLAM AND JUDAISM

If there is any true kinship among the "three great monotheistic faiths" (as ironic as it may sound) it is between Islam and Judaism, not with Christianity. When he was just a regular guy in his pre-prophet days, Muhammad was probably a "Hanif", a member of a sect claiming spiritual descent from Abraham. Moreover, several Arab tribes had adopted Judaism of some form. One (like the later Central Asian Khazars) became a Judaic kingdom for a time. Islam, like Christianity, arose out of a Judaic milieu. Some writers say that Muhammad was a Christian before creating his own strange religious blend. To some degree, both early Islam and early Christianity (until Paul) are efforts to reform, purify and unify Judaic and pre-Judaic Hebrew beliefs. While the Pauline church gave up some Mosaic and all Talmudic/Pharisaic law codes, circumcision, ritual foods, and the like, Islam did not. Because of his pre-existing Christo-Gnostic-Judaic-quasi-Abrahamic belief system, Muhammad naturally expected Christians, but especially Jews, and more especially, those of the Arab-Jewish tribes, to see the light. He evidently anticipated more success than Jesus, whom the Jews rejected and killed some 600 years earlier. Surely, thought Muhammad, they will follow me and recognize Allah. They did not. As well as ridding the newly-conquered Islamic lands of the idolater-Christians, Muhammad also annihilated the Jewish and Jewish-Arab tribes of North Africa in one of the first bloody Islamic Jihads.

This is a lesson and a proto-type. The Ones In Submission must tolerate the infidels only so long. Once they have been given a chance to convert and refuse, then conversion by the conquest of holy war is seen as not only legitimate, but demanded.

But as I said, this should be judged in context. As exemplified amply in the Old Testament, and foreshadowing the Christian Crusaders yet to come, early Islam follows an ancient tradition of holy war and murder in the name of a god. Sir Richard Burton said, "And did Moses disdain to place carnal weapons in the hands of his people? The great Lawgiver of Israel sanctioned the murder in cold blood of women and child captives. Even kings were hewed in pieces before the Lord." This is a fascinating line of inquiry to follow as it leads to the conclusion that what we today know as "Jihad" has both Mosaic and Talmudic-Jewish roots. One of many famous stories about Muhammad concerns an attempted poisoning by a Jewess. After this, not to mention the consistently unrelenting and often bitter rejections by the Jews, he finally gave up on converting them. Muslims were now told to face Mecca for prayer, where previously, they faced Jerusalem.

There are more likenesses. Ritual food preparations are almost identical. Halal food may be substituted when a Kosher meal is not available, and vice versa. Both the Orthodox Jew and the devoutly observant Muslim prefer the unshaved beard, though the Islamists omit the Hasidic forelocks. Islam has no real "Sabbath" but Friday (often in the evening) became the day a Mullah might preach a sermon and read from the Koran. The Jewish Sabbath begins on Friday night. Islam has no liturgical music or dance (except in Sufi mystical sects).

We have the Koran, which has ample texts refuting (“abridging” say the Muslims) itself, and then we have the Hadiths, which function like the Talmud as a guide to get around, avoid and evade what is found in the primary scriptures. Sharia Law operates quite like Rabbinical Talmudic Law. One submits disputes to a court of Mullahs and Koranic scholars and judges who decide the case on that basis. Both Judaism and Islam are best described as legal systems rather than religions. This is essentially the same as the Rabbinical beit din court. In another interesting parallel, one can change his/her name after converting to either Islam or Orthodox Talmudism. Almost every convert to Islam changes their name, and immigrants to Israel have the right to adopt a “Jewish name” when moving there. Women are not really regarded very highly in either faith. Some mosques, like some synagogues, separate male and female worshippers.

There are other similarities as well, but lately on TV, some of them are uncannily mirrored in rituals and educational practices. Koranic study, like Talmudic study, is intense. If he (like Jews, women are not encouraged to study scripture) learns to recite the Koran from memory, he bears the honorific, Hafiz. Watch the young Islamic boys at Madrassah schools, in their skullcaps, swaying back and forth reciting the Koran just as Jewish boys in yarmulkes recite the Talmud. The Jewish swaying and nodding is seen on TV at the "Wailing and Whining Wall" in Jerusalem. Curiously, the little "beanie" cap is found in Christianity too. Just look at the Pope, the Cardinals and the Bishops. Looking at clergy of all religions, a mullah is more akin to the rabbinical model, as he is, above all, a Judge, an interpreter of the Sharia of Allah. Burial practices are similar as well. The actual rites are simple -- what we see on TV at Muslim martyr-funerals are the public parts, heavily politicized, especially the parade with the ubiquitous Martyr Photo (posing for the photo is a big deal accompanied by a celebration) plastered on big posters carried by the mourning crowd, always accompanied by a cacophony of ululating Muslim women. Muslims, as do the Orthodox Talmudist Jews, inter the body very quickly after the death.

Formerly, all three religions forbade usury. Christianity gave this up in the 1500s, and Jews can practice all the usury they want with non-Jews, but Islamic banking still holds to the non-usurious model. Naturally, the international banking and trade cartel would like to suppress and destroy this rival system, but seem to be content with merely co-opting it. Whether you charge interest or not, you have to have money, and money comes through the cartel. Again, this is a topic worth further exploration as this may be a very positive contribution, and also an interesting parallel.

In another likeness, both Jews and Muslims are quite exclusive, essentially regarding those who do not practice their true religion as heathens at best and cattle/goyim sub-humans at worst. One who has submitted to the purity of Islam does not make friends or confidants of such types. Strongly echoing the Talmud, the Koran says:

"O ye who believe! Take not Jews and Christians for your friends and protectors; they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them is of them. Verily, Allah guideth not a people unjust." Sura 5:51

This is very enlightening in the face of current events and recent history. Think of this verse, then think of all the trouble Islamic countries have with U.S. military and cultural presences in Muslim lands. No wonder Osama bin Laden and many others think that the Saudi royals apostatized and betrayed the Koran by allowing American military protectors on holy soil. And maybe the part of the verse I highlighted is not so far off base when one thinks of the "Christian" U.S. and its backing of Israeli Jewish terrorism toward Palestinians.

Within the last decade, the number of Muslims exceeded the number of Jews in the U.S. Like a large number of Jews, most Muslims come from abroad. Counting undocumented aliens, the figures may be much higher. There are other ironic and seeming incongruous similarities between the two religions as well, but this short survey will have to suffice for now.

THE KORAN SPEAKS ON AND JEWS CHRISTIANS

Essentially and fundamentally, the Koran allows for no other religions. Pagans are particularly despised, as the present-day animists of southern Sudan know as well as the almost equally despised Christians of that sad region, and the destruction of the centuries-old Buddha statues by the Afghan Taliban represents how a Muslim, strictly speaking, should handle such pre-Islamic barbarism. “The People of the Book,” that is, Jews and Christians, are to be barely tolerated – but taxed. As are critics of any religious text, I will be inevitably accused of taking all of this out of context, but that begs the basic question of why they are there, not to mention what they mean for hundreds of millions of Muslims. With that said, please consider the following ayahs.

{SURA (Chapter): AYAH (verse).}
2:62. Those who believe (in the Qur'an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians,- any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
2:113. The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon." Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but God will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.
2:120. Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of God,-that is the (only) Guidance." Wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor helper against God.
2:135. They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with God."
2.140. Or do ye say that Abraham, Isma'il Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Do ye know better than God? Ah! who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from God? but God is not unmindful of what ye do!
4:46. Of the Jews there are those who displace words from their (right) places, and say: "We hear and we disobey"; and "Hear what is not Heard"; and "Ra'ina"; with a twist of their tongues and a slander to Faith. If only they had said: "What hear and we obey"; and "Do hear"; and "Do look at us"; it would have been better for them, and more proper; but God hath cursed them for their Unbelief; and but few of them will believe.
4:160. For the iniquity of the Jews We made unlawful for them certain (foods) good and wholesome which had been lawful for them;- in that they hindered many from God's Way;-
5:15. From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will God show them what it is they have done.
5:20. (Both) the Jews and the Christians say: "We are sons of God, and his beloved." Say: "Why then doth He punish you for your sins? Nay, ye are but men,- of the men he hath created: He forgiveth whom He pleaseth, and He punisheth whom He pleaseth: and to God belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between: and unto Him is the final goal (of all)"
5:44. O Apostle! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say "We believe" with their lips but whose