Is There Anything to the “Taqiyyah” Accusation Against Muslims?

EPGAH writes:

How do you know what the Muslims in your town TELL you is really how they feel, and not just “Taqiyyah”?

They’re not lying to me.

Most of the ones who bother to come here get over the “hate the infidels” bull. Hell, if they are even willing to work with Jews in New York, they cannot be too into the hate the infidel bullshit.

I have met a few Muslims who were somewhat radicalized. They don’t really try to hide it honestly.

I think this “taqiyya” thing is massively exaggerated. Taqqiya was supposed to allow Muslims to lie when they are in a population that is hostile and oppressive towards Muslims. That is, they are allowed to lie to get by in a hostile environment. The Jews, Alawi, Druze, Yezidis and others all have similar customs. I am afraid that most of this taqiyya bull is just Islamophobic nonsense.

Even the Palestinians in this town are not very radical. I met four of them. I was shocked at how moderate they were. I was much more radical on the subject of Israel than they were. They practically considered me to be a terrorist based on the way I talked. The attitude of many of the Palestinians who come to the US is “The Hell with the Israel-Palestine conflict. We are done with that BS, and we have to come to America to forget about it, move on and let bygones be bygones.”

I met two brothers who told me that the Jews had out and out stolen 50 acres of their family’s land in the West Bank and turned it into a military base. They never got paid one nickel for it, and the Jews are never going to give it back. But they didn’t even sound very radical when they were talking about that. They sounded like they wanted to forget about it and move on.

I will say one thing. Muslims here respect you a lot more if you are religious. I imagine they do not think too much of atheists. I told them that I went to the local Catholic Church and they were very happy like, “Good! You worship God! Everyone should have a religion.”

One of the Palestinians even said, “Why don’t you like Islam? There’s nothing wrong with Islam. Islam is just like Catholicism. There’s not much difference really.” He seemed to respect Catholicism as some sort of rather conservative creed that worshiped the same God the Muslims did.

One thing I will say though is if you get close to these Muslims here, they will try to convert you to Islam. They already tried that with me. They invite you to a big meal at the mosque, and apparently this is a way to try to convert you. Islam is definitely a proselytizing religion.

Please follow and like us:

39 thoughts on “Is There Anything to the “Taqiyyah” Accusation Against Muslims?”

  1. Even the Palestinians in this town are not very radical. I met four of them. I was shocked at how moderate they were. I was much more radical on the subject of Israel than they were. They practically considered me to be a terrorist based on the way I talked. The attitude of many of the Palestinians who come to the US is “The Hell with the Israel-Palestine conflict. We are done with that BS, and we have to come to America to forget about it, move on and let bygones be bygones.”

    I once hung out with a group of stoners in Amsterdam which included a Palestinian-American “Rasta”. He was a pretty cool guy, didn’t think he must have been much into the Islam thing as he was getting drunk rather obnoxiously. Quite a few Muslims enjoy their liquor beverages but they tend to be rather squeamish about their drunkenness. Not this Palestinian guy though. He was really really cool and laidback.

    1. Bukhari (50:369) – Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered.

      Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later. Some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

      Bukhari (52:269) – “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.'” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad’s men after he “guaranteed” them safe passage!

      The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well that John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, claimed well after the fact that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’

      The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Quran puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

      The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) insists that it “has not now or ever been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood, or supported any covert, illegal, or terrorist activity or organization.” In fact, it was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and has bankrolled Hamas. At least nine founders or board members of ISNA have been accused by prosecutors of supporting terrorism.

      The notorious Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is so well known for shamelessly lying about its ties to terror and extremism that books have been written on the subject.

      Prior to engineering several deadly terror plots, such as the Fort Hood Massacre and the attempt to blow up a Detroit-bound airliner, American cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was regularly sought out by NPR, PBS and even government leaders to expound on the peaceful nature of Islam. And now, we have HAMAS — the Palestinian TERRORIST organization that puts missiles in schools — lecturing Trump about how “peaceful” Moslems are!

  2. I would like to make a correction here. Taqiyya isn’t a concept which allows you to lie just to make life easier. Infact it means that you can only do so if your life comes into threat solely for your religion. It’s only applicable in this circumstance. I’m not trying to convert you here, just telling you that Islam is a practical and rational religion. If you should be a judge of it, whether negatively or positively, read the Quran yourself and then decide rather than just depending on things you hear from the media such as “72 virgins” or “Quran tells Muslims to slay infidels”. No this is not Good enough of an excuse to hate Islam. Be rational, read the Quran, and judge it on your own thinking. If you don’t want to read it, then it’s best to stay quiet on the subject.

    Peace 🙂

    1. I HAVE read the Quran, thank you.
      The near absence of Quranic verses and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Moslems are convinced that their religion teaches honesty.

      However, it DOES say Allah is the greatest of schemers, and encourages adherents to say anything to weaken non-believers, put us in a vulnerable state to conquer us.
      Also, since Muhammad itself lied to enemies to weaken them and conquer them, and Moslems want to EMULATE Muhammad, it means they will do the same thing. Also, in non-Quranic history, they HAVE done the same thing!

      But technically, you are correct, I meant kitman, not taquiyyah!

    2. Taquiyyah is lying about your religion to protect your own well-being, i.e., so we don’t slaughter you.
      Kitman is lying to lull non-believers into a false sense of security so you can slaughter us.

      Please explain to me what is “practical” or “rational” about the London subway bombings, the Paris attack, the San Bernadino shootings, and of course the rampant gang-rapes of European women by Moslem savages?

      If you want to say the terrorists are “No True Moslems”, I would’ve believed that, EXCEPT that in Iraq, Afghanistan, and probably other places, the TRUE Moslems joined with the “fake Moslems” to kill US instead of joining with US to kill the fakes that give them a bad name.
      Apologists also often quote a fragment of 5:32, which says that if one murders it’s like killing all of mankind.
      If you read the entire thing, Moslems are actually COMPELLED to murder in cases of “corruption” or “mischief”.

      And have historically interpreted “mischief” to include resistance to the terrorist cult!
      And even conversion is no sure defense!
      Consider the fate of the Jadhima.
      Moslem “missionaries” approached their tribe, one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already “converted” to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others believed they could trust the Moslem leader’s promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded – Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

      After San Bernadino, Moslems and their apologists are trying to get us to lay down our arms! Those who don’t remember history are doomed to repeat it, and I don’t want that doom!

    3. Don’t get me wrong, it’s TOTALLY practical to hide missiles in normally civilian installations, and using the ensuing civilian casualties as grist for their bloody PR mill.

      However, this just increases the heat other Moslems will take for it later, as this kind of dishonorable combat is considered disgusting to most of us.
      And of course, MOST of us accept the consequences if we attack others, Moslems still call it “Islamophobia” when the Civilized World hits back, or “oppression” when they get punished for breaking their betters’ laws.

      Ironically, one of the best Moslem apologists on this site claims Moslems are RETARDED, so they should be excused for the bad things they do!

  3. Islamophobic? Really? Even for the politicians who WANTED the terrorists, they’re a “NIMBY” issue. “Not In My Backyard, Yours”

    The very politicians in Germany who fought so hard to let MILLIONS of the scum in are now backpedaling at an Armstrong Level to NOT let them live in the GOOD areas — basically “Not In My Backyard, YOURS!”
    Or if you prefer, “Give Until It Hurts…SOMEONE ELSE!”?

  4. As to phobia, phobia is an UNREASONABLE FEAR, and after San Bernadino, Paris, and the Moslem Rape Wave, exactly where is the “Unreasonable” part? “Islamophobia” accusations are now being thrown around with the same reasons — and similar results — to “racism” accusations from groups that DON’T have a 1400-year history of terrorism.
    Even if we somehow forgot the past 1400 years, the shit Moslems have done to us in the last 14 years, would be enough to make it reasonable, don’t you think?

    If not, how much do the terrorists have to do to their betters before it’s “reasonable” to fear them?

  5. You are correct, though, I didn’t mean “Taquiyyah”, I meant “Kitman”.
    Lying by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

  6. Today’s Moslems often try to justify Muhammad’s murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by falsely claiming that they broke a treaty with their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Moslems. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Moslems are distinctly non-binding in the Moslem mindset. Why do you think we don’t trust Iran’s “promise” NOT to build a nuke if we give them $140 BILLION?

    Leaders in the Arab world sometimes say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then say something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.

  7. “The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad.”

    Somewhat off topic, but there well may have been an actual bomb on that plane. Phone calls from people aboard this and the other planes mention bombs and threats of bombs. The box cutter thing that is in the pubic consciousness came from one cell phone call that the FBI later said didn’t happen. The wreckage of Flight 93 is more consistent with it being destroyed by a bomb. One plausible explanation of what happened is that the terrorists really did have a bomb on board and set it off when the passengers started to not cooperate.

    Of course this raises the question of how the terrorists got bombs aboard the planes, so this is another thing that has gone into the memory hole.

    1. Yes, but that was not my point. My point was they lied to their victims that they would be fine if they didn’t resist!

      You quoted the wrong paragraph, BTW:
      The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true

    2. Look what happened to the ones who DIDN’T resist: They were cooked in the planes when they were used as kamikaze missiles.
      So their choice REALLY came down to:
      1.) Die by NOT resisting and kill thousands of OTHER innocents.
      2.) Resist and die, but save thousands of innocents.

      United 93 (and the movie they made of it) is about the strange kind of “heroism” that results when you KNOW you’re doomed either way.

      Same reason “Charge of the Light Brigade” is so popular, right?

  8. When I was in Qatar someone tried to convert me to Islam and gave me some literature. I didn’t convert, but the literature was interesting, so I’m glad this happens. The religions that are big on trying to get converts are Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Mormonism, though the Buddhists don’t seem very aggressive about it.

    1. Yes, but please don’t pretend they’re morally equal.
      Christians don’t demand recent converts blow themselves up and take a lot of others with them.
      Christians don’t stockpile missiles in schools.
      The CIA Factbook doesn’t have a record of Christians getting more violent the higher the percentage of the population they comprise!

      The Crusades and Inquisition were to get the terrorists OUT of Europe. Now that they’re re-invading, we have a better perspective of why Christians wanted them gone 900 years ago, don’t you think?

      1. The crusades especially are depicted as a sort of proto colonialism perpatrated by the West against poor, innocent, brown skinned people who only wanted to live in peace.

        It’s an almost perfect inversion of history.

        1. Bingo, it’s always shown as CHRISTIAN “aggression”, but actually, it was Christians finally fighting back against NON-Christian aggression!

          But that doesn’t fit the “Wicked Whites” narrative!

  9. Taqiyya and Kitman are almost exclusively Shia things anyway, and most of the Muslims causing problems in Europe are Sunni or from Sunni backgrounds. And it’s not like it’s a licence to lie and deceive, Taqiyya was something developed when the Shia were being persecuted by the Sunnis and it’s quite strictly to be used in war when a Muslim could be killed for their faith. And it would take a great amount of sophistry to claim Muslims are being persecuted for their faith in the West. Most Muslims have no idea what Taqiyya is. Frankly, “Taqiyya” is just a scary-sounding Arabic buzzword used by hardcore Israel-lovers like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer et al.

    1. Yes, I have brought up Taqiyya to a number of Muslims I know, and they all said, “What’s that? I never heard of it.” I explained it to them and they said they still had never heard of it. “No, Islam does not give you permission to lie,” they all told me.

      1. I had no idea what it was until the like of Pam Geller began tossing it around…It’s the Shia equivalent of “Crypto-Jew” in the European context, I.E a means of avoiding being lynched b the majority religious population..

      2. You mean like when women denied the existence of Alphas, Betas, and Game, in your earlier article?

        You can’t really expect any enemy to admit they don’t play fair, much less GIVE you their playbook. Ironically, you wrote that about feminists, but don’t believe it about terrorists.

    2. Taquiyyah is lying to the Inquisition about whether you’re Moslem or not to avoid your own destruction.
      Kitman, on the other hand, is telling the world that the Moslem Cult is peaceful NOW, and has always been peaceful, the Crusades were CHRISTIAN aggression, and “Allahu AKBAR”, the terrorist battlecry, is caused by AK=Kalashnikov, and BAR=Browning Automatic Rifle, i.e., GUNS are the problem, not the Moslem Cult.

      If the terrorists are “Not True Moslems”, then why don’t the REAL Moslems join with us and wipe out these fakes? In Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Beslan, etc., “Real” and “Fake” Moslems seem to be killing the Civilized World’s troops.
      And why DOES the Moslem Cult whine so much when these FAKE MOSLEMS are getting killed? They should be celebrating when the terrorists DIE, not cheering when the terrorists get a particularly good hit in on us!

      Who or what was dancing in the streets on 9/11?

        1. I want to say this is the dumbest excuse I’ve ever read, but right now, that award goes to Kerry’s claim that keeping terrorists OUT will somehow be more dangerous than letting them in. We have experience that the latter is dangerous, namely, the San Bernadino shooting.

          If we keep them OUT, then what? They’ll get violent? Great, because their violence will be in their own countries, rather than ours!

  10. To EPGAH:

    I have a few questions for you that I hope you will give a fair, just and unbiased answer to.

    If Islam breeds terrorism and is the cause of all terrorism, then why has this phenomenon been happening at an unparalleled intensity in the last 60 years and more so in the last 20 years and not before that?

    If Islam allows or rather advocates for the forceful conversion of all non-Muslims, then why do islands of non-Muslim communities still exist in Muslim world after the passage of 1400 years? Examples are Coptics of Egypt, Assyrians of Iraq, Christians in Palestine and Lebanon, Jewish communities in North Africa, Yemen, Turkey, Iraq and even Iran. Why do Muslims constitute only 10 % of the population in India despite being ruled by them for about 800 years? Even if you combine the Muslims of Pakistan and Bangladesh, Muslims will still be a minority in the Indian Sub-continent. Why didn’t these ‘intolerant Muslims’ demolish the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem or at least convert it into a mosque? There are numerous other examples of other religious minorities such as the Zoroastrians, Druze, Yezidies, Hindus and Sikhs etc. living in peace and harmony among populations of Muslims.

    This is not to say that Muslims did not do any war or violence in the course of history but the fact is that the cause of most of those wars were political rather than religious. And the struggle for power and dominance and resorting to war and violence to achieve your goals has been done by all peoples at all times, then why should we be setting different standards for Muslims.

    Measuring by your standards, Western Christiandom has been the cause of more violence and oppression than anybody else and has been a culprit in it. Starting from the Crusades, and then the period of Inquisition up till the age of colonialism and slavery which wiped out entire communities of indigenous people in Africa and America. Noe-colonialism, Fascism (Holocaust), and Apartheid are just a few gifts of the ‘Enlightened Western Civilization’ in the 20th Century. The process of occupation and illegal invasion of countries especially in the Muslim World still continues into the 21st century but this is now done in the name of regime change, exporting democracy and promoting universal human values.

    1. Islam has always been violent, but was kept under control by threat of reprisal from non-Moslems.

      Yes, the Moslem Cult is a POLITICAL entity disguised as a RELIGION.
      The Moslem Cult has “tolerance” of non-Moslems, but demands a Jizya for this “tolerance”. This is not TOLERANCE, this is PROTECTION RACKETEERING.
      And even then they can be killed. Have you not read about the murders of Coptic Christians or non-Moslems in any of those countries? Or the “Conversion Gangs” in Africa? Is that your “peace and harmony”?
      What about the Somalian and now Nigerian pirates, who are doing so in the name of the Moslem Cult? Not a SINGLE Christian, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, or Atheist pirate among them! How do you reconcile that with your “peace and harmony”?

      We don’t set different standards for Moslems. We expect surrenders and treaties to be BINDING. How many times has the Moslem Cult “surrendered” to the Civilized World…and how many times have they attacked again? The Civilized World enforces peace. Whoever breaks the peace needs to be punished, from one of our own, like Hitler, to Saddam, or that Moslem terrorist who took over Egypt recently.
      How do you propose we enforce peace without fighting those who break it? Should the Moslems not be punished when they “resort to war” in their Jihad–struggle for dominance–against the Civilized World?

      Do you consider the Crusades “Christian Violence”, or merely the Christians decolonizing their territory from Moslem occupiers?
      The Inquisition was hunting down the Moslems’ Agents. Remember, they did not take most cities by open and fair warfare, but by trickery, from pretending to be unarmed traders and having a separate group smuggle them weapons, to taking hostages and DEMANDING the city surrender!
      Fool us once, shame on you, fool us twice, shame on us, right?
      I don’t know how many times the Moslem Cult has fooled us into thinking they’re peaceful by now. You must be very proud, right?

      Do you deem the Moslem invasion&occupation of Europe (Then or now) to be illegal? Or does that ONLY apply to the Civilized World when we have to invade a Moslem terrorist country to punish it for its aggression?

      As to the Moslems occupying India, weren’t they separated off into Pakistan?

      Instead of occupying, would it be better to you if we just cauterized terrorists, one city at a time, like we did with the Japanese? I feel that occupying the countries gives the terrorists something to shoot at and therefore the idea they might win.
      Russia IS more brutal about wiping out terrorists, but it IS more effective.

      The natives in America were wiped out by invaders from across the Bering Strait. They did not set aside any Reservations for the vanquished.
      So let’s talk about their “replacement”. As to wiping out savages, that is just warfare. You just implied it’s OK if the war is political, rather than religious, right? In AMERICA, savages sold land to English, then reneged on the Deal and tried to kill us and take it back. I’m not sure if that was fraud, theft, or just old-fashioned ATTEMPTED conquest of their betters.
      Either way, the savages are not bitching because the war, they’re bitching because they LOST the fight they started! And of course, they’re only AROUND to bitch BECAUSE we set aside land and pay their way cradle to grave. Should we have wiped them out like they did the natives of America?

      Look up the Skraeling Saga for what would’ve happened to us if we had LOST the fight with the savages. The Vikings were killed to the last “man” who happened to be a PREGNANT WOMAN! So I guess the regard for women and children is NOT a Universal Value, it’s only the Civilized World’s idea that we have to enforce on savages, right?
      This would be promoting the values we WISH were universal, but clearly are not. Wasn’t that one of your bones of contention?

      Look at the savages overthrowing our countries like South Africa. What happens to the landowners then? Look up “Farm Murders” for a good answer. Also notice it CONTINUES TO THIS DAY! They’re not nice occupiers like the Civilized World are, they KEEP killing even after they “won”. The only thing that stops them is that some of their would-be victims hired private guards, and live like a World War II re-enactment.
      Why should ANYONE live like this in their own country?

      Also, you brought up slavery, but the Moslem Cult is not only NOT AGAINST slavery, but some Moslem bigwig in Qatar said that sex slavery — the worst KIND of slavery — is a “right” of the Moslem terrorists!

      As to your indignation about Apartheid, what is wrong with keeping those who want to kill us away from us? Sharia does not treat non-Moslems equal to Moslems, why are you suddenly indignant that the Civilized World might be unequal in the name of self-preservation?

      I hope you will give a fair, just, and unbiased answer to all the questions I’ve asked here, ESPECIALLY the ones that point out the Moslem Cult did to others what we do to savages!
      I do not expect you to suddenly see the light and admit the Moslem Cult is causing the problems that it’s up to the Civilized World, plus Russia to stop.

    2. In the last 60 years, have or have not the Moslem terrorists gained an unprecedented level of FIREPOWER, from AKs to NUKES in some cases?
      This removes their fear of reprisal.
      But the bigger question is, why attain these weapons, if not to attack the Civilized World?

      When the Moslem Cult invades the Civilized World, are they not violent and oppressive to the people who belong there? Isn’t trying to force a Caliphate exporting theocracy, forcing regime change, and destroying human values we like to BELIEVE are universal?

      Why does the Moslem Cult still struggle for dominance, rather than accept their rank in the world? Maybe dominance is more a priority than peace for the terrorists?
      Do you REALLY believe that Christendom is more violent than the Moslem Cult? Or only that we HAVE to use violence to put violent savages in their place, and the only thing that keeps them there is threat of more violence? Look what happens in Europe when savages think they won’t be punished…Or more recently in San Bernadino?

    3. Don’t forget, the Moslem Cult was America’s first enemy outside our borders. Look up the Barbary Pirates. Raided our ships, stole the cargo, enslaved the crews! And all this WHILE we were paying 20% of our GDP as Protection Money!

      And if you’re REALLY upset that Europe conquered the savages around the globe, please remember, Europe was conquered and occupied by Moslem terrorists for 700 years! This DEFINITELY kickstarted our own aggression, “Conquer the savages so we don’t GET conquered by them!”

      You bitch about short occupations for punishment of your aggressions, you hate being occupied, right? Yet the terrorists did it to us for 700 years, didn’t they?

      And again, what are the terrorists doing to their betters when we open our doors and give them refuge in our countries?
      1.) Thank us!
      2.) Rape and massacre us!

      So really, the question is more “Why haven’t we wiped out the recidivist and treacherous Moslem Cult?”, not “Why don’t we trust them?”, don’t you think?

      1. You asked why we should treat the Moslem Cult different.
        What you’re REALLY bitching about is that we don’t treat the Moslem Cult different: We counterattack them until they at least pretend to surrender.

        In your eyes, then, we should treat the Moslems different than any other savages that keep attacking, then surrendering, then attacking again?

        You already got your wish, we went easier on the Moslem terrorists than we did on the savages in America, or the sneak-attacking Japanese. But we fight all our enemies until they stop attacking us. To do otherwise is suicide.

        Indeed, we’re taking our enemies — YOUR terrorist ilk — into our countries, ALIVE as REFUGEES, not as prisoners — and they show “gratitude” by attacking their betters.
        And yet, YOU, their fellow terrorists, refuse to allow them berth in YOUR countries. Why? They share your cult, they share your lack of “Universal” Values! Unless…this is just another Moslem trick?
        Like the fake surrenders? Is seeking “refuge” the ultimate fake surrender and therefore the ultimate setup for a betrayal.

        If the Civilized World survives these betrayals, shouldn’t you expect to be pounded down with renewed strength…Maybe even reduced to Reservations like we did a certain OTHER group of savages who couldn’t abide by treaties?

        Or do you expect the Civilized World to keep treating the Moslems as exempt from everything from treaties to rules of war to the strictures against rape to the fate of a repeat enemy?

  11. Have any of you read Sharia Law? It’s more frightening even than I thought.
    1- Jihad, defined as “to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion,” is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

    2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

    3- A Caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.

    4- A percentage of Zakat (charity money) must go towards jihad.

    5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.
    6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

    7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph if he rejects Islam.

    8- A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

    9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of: 1) an apostate; 2) an adulterer; 3) a highway robber. Vigilante street justice and honor killing is acceptable.

    10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim, but will get it for killing a Muslim.

    11- Sharia “never” abolished slavery, sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave.

    12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging even for crimes of sin such as adultery.
    3- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. They must comply to Islamic law if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

    14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. But Muslims can curse non-Muslims.

    15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

    16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.
    17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or bathhouse attendants. Women in low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

    18- A non-Muslim cannot rule — even over a non-Muslim minority.

    19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

    20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and can be consummated at age 8 or 9.

    21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.
    22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you” and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

    23- There is no community property between husband and wife and the husband’s property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

    24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits.

    25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him — even if he is polygamous.

    26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman’s sexual organs.

    27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and women captured in battle, and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

    28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

    29- A woman loses custody if she remarries.

    30- To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses.
    31- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim.

    32- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body, which is considered “Awrah,” a sexual organ. Not all Sharia schools allow the face of a woman exposed.

    33- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife at the time he caught her in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women, since the man “could be married to the woman he was caught with.”

    34-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory. That means that for the sake of abiding with Islam’s commandments, such as jihad, a Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying.

  12. Dear EPGAH:

    Your statements are not only biased but also unfair and unjust. I can clearly see a paranoia in your narrative of Islam and Muslims. Many westerners I’ve seen are pretty rational and realistic when it comes to analyzing issues. They think, talk and write in a rational and logical manner. But I will consider you an exception to this rule as there are exceptions to every rule.

    The main reason for an increase in radicalization and violence by certain Muslim groups in the past 60 years is the Israel-Palestine issue. The unconditional support of the West especially of the US for the state of Israel has pushed more Muslims towards radicalization and to be anti-West and anti-US. On top of that, the US invasion of some Muslim countries in the past two decades and its support for totalitarian regimes in some Muslim countries has only added into this hatred of the US. If it was all about killing and hating ‘the infidels’ as you’ve put it, why is then the radicalized groups not targeting other non-Muslim countries or their interests. Why aren’t embassies of countries such as Mexico, Chili, Brazil, Venezuela, Poland, Switzerland, Japan, China, Zimbabwe, Congo, Sweden, Norway, Portugal etc etc etc. not bombed or their military or civilian targets not attacked. Are they all spared with the hope that they will one day be converted to Islam or are they paying enough ‘Jizya’ to earn themselves a protection?

    As long as the US and some Western countries continue invading other lands in the name of installing democracy and free market economy, or under the pretext of promoting human rights and ‘universal values’, you shouldn’t expect love and respect in return.

    As long as the US and some Western countries continue imposing their dominance in the name of universal human rights values even on some non-Muslim countries, they will not be liked by the people of these countries for doing so. Why should people in Uganda love the UK if they make their aid conditional to Uganda legalizing gay marriage in the name of respect for universal values. Not to mention the CIA attempts to topple the democratically elected government in Venezuela.

    Instead of spreading hatred or making research on Sharia, you better use your time for something constructive.

    I bet you can be a good adviser for the likes of Al-Baghdadi or Donald Trump.


    1. YOU are extremely unfair, unjust, and biased!

      I don’t expect love and respect in return. I expect the end of slavery, the end of attacks on our shipping routes, and the end of stealing our property.

      What exactly do the terrorists have against Israel? It’s smaller than New Jersey, shouldn’t their amazing tolerance include that?

      What did France, Sweden, and Germany do to the terrorists then to deserve what the terrorists are doing to them?

      As to supporting totalitarian regimes, your research is very biased. The ones we support are only antitheft devices. The ones that replace them try to steal American or other Civilized World properties.

      Before you talk about the “Democratically-elected Government” in Venezuela, look at all the properties of America and other Civilized World countries Venezuela STOLE under that regime?

      What is the Moslem Cult’s penalty for theft, and why is it not applied to those that steal our properties? Oh, that’s right, we’re not Moslems, so we don’t get the protections, right? We don’t get to chop off thieves’ arms?

      As to the Uganda aid question, why should any Civilized World country give enemies aid at ALL?
      How much aid have the Moslem Cult sent to anyone? And under what conditions?
      HAMAS even makes FOOD dependent on fighting the Civilized World with them. So why are you upset that the Civilized World has strings on our aid too?

    2. PS, how many times do the Moslems have to attack us, shoot up a theater, or a hospital, before it stops being “paranoia”, and starts being a legitimate/rational/realistic analysis of an enemy?

    3. As to why you don’t fuck with China, it’s because China is currently protecting Iran from the Civilized World. If the terrorists fuck with them, that protection would not only be rescinded, but China would unilaterally make a parking lot out of Iran, and then “ask” the rest of the cult if they had a problem with that. At that point, whether Kitman or understanding of consequences for attacking your benefactor, the others would CLAIM they had no problem with it.

      I notice you left RUSSIA out of your list. Any particular reason for that?
      Maybe because RUSSIA is the one currently leading the fight against terrorism and making America look anemic/pathetic by comparison?

      Can you at least just admit you’re not really mad about universal human rights or free market, you’re mad that the Civilized World is dominating the Moslem Cult, and your worldview is based on the Moslem Cult dominating the Civilized World?

    4. PPS: I’m not spreading hate against the Moslems. I don’t have to. Their actions in the last, say, 14 days has done more to dehumanize them in the eyes of the Civilized World and “radicalize” Americans, French, Germans, Swedes, even BRITS against them than I or any number of PR experts ever could.

      And when people like you keep saying, “Moslems are peaceful, BUT” then blaming the victims, it makes the Cult look dishonest or at least irresponsible as well as violent.
      Keep attacking our civilian installations, and keep wondering why we feel the terrorists need airstrikes or invasions. May your sense of self-preservation ever be that dim.


    5. Speaking of “something constructive”, how come the Moslem Cult doesn’t do “something constructive”? All you export is oil, Chaos, and Death.

      Israel — your “arch-nemesis” — owns cell networks and exports Pentium tech.

      South Korea has everything from cars to the electronic giant SAMSUNG.

      India and Philippines are outsourcing destinations with DECIDEDLY mixed results.

      Sweden has become an inventing hothouse.

      Switzerland does banking.

      France does wine. (and wines that you terrorists attack them even though they’ve always supported you terrorists.)

      Why can’t the Moslem Cult produce something OTHER than terrorists?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)