Should the Koran be banned? 75 % of our readers voted YES!

And rightly so:  We ignore Islam at our peril. Undiagnosed and untreated, evil festers and grows. Like a cancer, it leaves nothing but death and destruction in its wake.

Here’s a good analysis of the Koran and a comparison with Hitlers ‘Mein Kampf’

Update:  Blowboy Brown in Deep Doodoo

GORDON Brown was last night accused of fiddling immigration figures after claiming the number of newcomers to Britain was falling.

Replacing the natives with a Mohammedan proletariat:  Nullabours scam is a bitter pill for Brits….

New Poll Starts Today:

Is every Muslim a potential terrorist?

Exposing the Myth of Moderate Islam

Perhaps you should read this before you vote:

Every “moderate” Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire. For a “moderate” Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith.

It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.” There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists – moderate, they are not.

by Ali Sina,, March 14, 2010

I have always maintained that “moderate Muslim” is an oxymoron. We have two kinds of Muslims: Terrorist Muslims and ignorant Muslims. The former are those who know Islam well and live by its dictums. The latter have no clue about their religion and have an idealized image of Islam that has no bases in facts.

Mr. Tarek Fatah’s editorial published in National Post on March 12, 2010 confirms my view. Fatah attended a debate between Dr. Wafa Sultan, the courageous ex-Muslim woman that shook the Arab world when in an Aljazeera televised debate she pointed out that the problem with the Muslim world is Islam, and Dr. Daniel Pipes, a scholar of Islamic history and the director of the Middle East Forum.

In this debate Pipes argued that Islam is not essentially an intolerant religion and that there have been instances when Jews who were persecuted in Christian countries had sought refuge in Muslim lands. Sultan disagreed and reminded her audience that Muhammad had raided several Jewish tribes who lived in Arabia, massacred their unarmed men and allowed his marauding band to rape their women, while always reserving the prettiest for himself.

Upon hearing these comments, Fatah was “traumatized”. “Even a hardened secular Muslim such as myself was deeply hurt by what I heard that evening,” wrote Fatah.

While acknowledging the validity of Sultan’s criticism of Islam, Fatah repined that “instead of using her newfound fame to challenge the established theocracies and corrupt kingdoms of the Middle East, Sultan veered off the deep end and could not resist the temptation of becoming the poster child of Islam haters, joining their ranks with the fervour of a convert.”

Why should Sultan challenge the established theocracies and corrupt kingdoms when these are the rotten fruits of the poisonous tree of Islam? The problem is Islam, these are the symptoms.

Fatah accused Sultan of fear mongering and telling to a predominantly Jewish audience, that Muhammad was a Jew killer. He wrote “Wafa Sultan delivered an astonishing account of how the Prophet had slaughtered Jews and then raped the wife of the defeated Jewish tribe.”

Astonishing account? These accounts were reported by early Muslim historians. If Fatah is astonished it is because he, like most Muslims, has not read the history of Islam. Few Muslims care to investigate their religion. The references to Muhammad’s raids, rapes and lootings can also be found in the Quran. Muslims chant the Quran for thawab (reward), but they don’t study it and often don’t understand what they read.

The hatred of the Jews is in the Quran. The first sura of this book is a prayer where Muslims supplicate to Allah “Show us the straight path. The path of those whom Thou hast favored; not the (path) of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.”

Muslims agree that “those whom Allah has favored,” are Muslims, “those who earn Allah’s anger,” and “those who go astray” are Jews, and Christians, respectively.

Jews are stereotyped as greedy in all Muslim countries. This is due to quranic verse that says Jews “cling to life more eagerly than any other people. …every one of them would love to live a thousand years,” but they will burn I hell. (2:96)

Many verses of the Quran portray the Jews as evil doers, wicked, transgressors, prophet killers, and despised by God. Because Muhammad hated the Jews, Muslims will always hate the Jews. This hatred is inseparable from Islam.

Fatah continued, “I left the synagogue deeply disturbed. In the fight against Islamofascism, Wafa Sultan’s hatred of Islam was cultivating the very forces she claims to be exposing. When a questioner asked her ‘What is the solution?’ she just shrugged her shoulders. Perhaps the answer she had in mind was too outrageous even by her own standards: Force Muslims to convert or die.”

Sultan has all the reasons to hate Islam. Former Muslims hate Islam because we hate discrimination against women, violence against non-Muslims, dictatorship and imposition of faith that characterizes the true Islam, and because we know the damage that his overgrown cult has done to our people, our culture and our countries. We don’t shrug our shoulders when asked for the solution. Obviously this “hardened secular Muslim” was so traumatized that he could no longer hear what Wafa Sultan was saying.

Former Muslims propose telling the truth as the solution. We believe that truth can set us free. Former Muslims do not advocate violence and hate against our own kin, brothers, sisters, parents, and loved ones. We strive for their freedom and their right to know the truth. We oppose censorship and political correctness that have enslaved the truth. Truth can hurt our feelings, but lies will kill us.

I do not disagree with Dr. Pipes’ historic account that sometimes Jews who were persecuted by Christians sought refuge among Muslims. However, I respectfully disagree with him when he presents this as evidence of the tolerance of Islam.

Islam is not tolerant because Muhammad was not tolerant. This does not mean all Muslims are intolerant. There have been many Islamic rulers who were tolerant, but they went against the canons of Islam, as many do today. That is why the jihadists who follow the true Islam are attacking these Muslim rulers.

Unlike the crusaders who wanted to convert everyone to Christianity, the jihadists don’t want to convert everyone to Islam. They want to establish the Caliphate and dominate the world. In an Islamic state, ruled under the Sharia, non-Muslims, particularly the people of Book, (Jews and Christians) are protected, as long as “they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Q: 9:29). This is no different from Nazism. Hitler did not want to convert everyone to Arians, nor did he want to exterminate all mankind. He wanted to dominate the world.

By drawing a distinction between Islamic terrorists and “moderate” Muslims Dr. Pipes is threading a dangerous path. One is either a Muslim, therefore emulates Muhammad and is a terrorist, or he is not a Muslim. Moderate Muslim makes as much sense as moderate Nazi.

Lies always come back to haunt us. A Muslim who does not practice Islam or believes Islam means peace is not a moderate Muslim, but a wishy-washy Muslim or an ignorant Muslim.

It is this myth that allows Glenn Beck to malign Geert Wilders and call him a “fascist,” or Jacqui Smith and other British officials to bar him from entering the U.K. There are countless good people who are harassed, prosecuted and called racists because of this myth.

I respectfully urge Dr. Pipes to stop promoting the myth of moderate Islam. I also cordially invite him to a written debate on this topic. Getting to the bottom of this matter goes beyond academic interest. This myth is endangering the lives of the critics of Islam and is violating their right to free speech. Good people are called islamophobe, bigot, racist and fascist because the world prefers politically correct untruths to the inconvenient truth. It is thanks to this myth that telling the truth has become the new hate speech.

Mr. Tarek Fatah proves my point that there is no such thing as moderate Muslim. He calls himself hardened secular, but cannot stand to hear a historic truth about his prophet. When he says, “Wafa Sultan’s hatred of Islam was cultivating the very forces she claims to be exposing,” he is talking about himself. Many honest Muslims prefer not to hide their heads in the sand; they face the truth and deal with it in a rational way.

I would like to remind the readers that virtually all Muslim terrorists come from a secular background. At one point they were just as “liberal” as Mr. Fatah is today until something happened in their lives and they turned to their faith.

Every “moderate” Muslim is a potential terrorist. The belief in Islam is like a tank of gasoline. It looks innocuous, until it meets the fire. For a “moderate” Muslim to become a murderous jihadist, all it takes is a spark of faith.

It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.” There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists – moderate, they are not.


A copy of this article was sent to National Post. Since they published Mr. Fatah’s attack on Dr. Sultan, I hope they would publish this response to him. However, if they refuse to publish it I won’t be offended. Most westerners have no problem shadowboxing the non-existing “political Islam,” as if dealing with a real entity different from Islam, but shun the real critics of Muhammad and Islam itself. This mighty task is left on the shoulders of the apostates of Islam and few heroic souls like Geert Wilders.

16 thoughts on “Should the Koran be banned? 75 % of our readers voted YES!”

  1. and if they are not a terrorist then they support it via zakat of which at least 1/8th is required to go to support their violent Jihadists or they tell us taqiyya-dribble that we are the misunderstanders of islam and wage the stealth jihad against us.

    Jihad can be waged by ‘the tongue’ (includes taqiyya, lawfare, claiming victimhood, etc), their wealth (zakat or muslim charity of which Ovomit stopped all the constraints of it flowing freely again), and/or by violence. Violence is always an option. Whenever Jihad is mentioned, 97% of the time it is mentioned as violence against the unbelievers.

  2. I said no it should not be banned. Why?

    Sounds great in theory but impossible to police in practice.

    Just more bureaucrats running around sticking their noses into others’ affairs.

    But more importantly, the more people become acquainted with the Koran the more likely they are to get a grip on the fact of Political Islam and its ideology.

    That would surely lead to a better informed electorate and in time election to Parliament of people to enact legislation to curtail the stealth Jihad that is now just getting underway.

    That would surely lead to a total revision of our immigration policy that is at present fundamentally opposed to the interests of the electorate.

    Maybe even the crazy greens might comed to their senses.

    So I say make it widely available so people can find out all about it for themselves.

    One of our basic problems is the shocking ignorance of the electorate in Australia.

    People have no idea what the Koran, the Sira, and the Hadith are all about.

  3. Reijo, I’m the first to agree with you: no book should be banned.

    In a perfect world we wouldn’t need to. In the case of the Koran, however, it would be merely symbolic; the texts are still available on the internet, so its mainly to sent a message out: don’t tread on me!

    As you know, bomb making manuals, instructions how to poison the water supply, how to blow up people on subways or how to abduct and murder children would also be banned, along with books about pedophilia and instructions to kill all people of a certain race, wouldn’t you agree?

  4. I agree that the contents of the koran (which doesn’t deserve a capital k) should be more widely known. Geert Wilders tried with his film Fitna. Amazingly, instead of saying: “Bloody hell, I had no idea the koran was so hate-mongering!” people persecute the film maker.
    Whenever I quote from the koran to my deluded and ostrich-acting friends, they just say: “So what. The old testament is full of the same crap.”
    Or “Well they have a right to be angry after all we’ve done to them” (!!!!)
    Or “Oh well, they’re just a tiny minority.”

    I find this to be the mindset of 90% of the people I talk about these things with, people who represent your normal middle-class westerner. I wonder how much proof they need.
    But they’ll have time to ruminate on these things as they sit at home with one hand cut off and the other buried in some Arab’s arse, while their husband (who’s allowed to go outside) is working away to pay for the masters’ upkeep.

  5. Sheik. Yes of course I agree with your argument that all vile publications ought to be banned in an ideal world.

    I would be the first to ban any material on paedophilia and other destructive anti social material.

    I can’t think of worse deeds than murder, and the abuse of children and I constantly wonder how it is that so many children in this day and age are victims of such bastards.

    Cecilie’s comments on the reaction of her friends to quotes from the koran (did I really put in a capital k?), is probably one of the single biggest concerns that we face today – the ignorance of people and their refusal to face the facts.

    The argument about Old Testament violence is an intellectually lazy classic non sequitur – a dog of an excuse – the kind of response typically made by people who are woefully ignorant of their Judeo-Christian heritage.

    As I said once before – people construct their own version of reality – primarily in their formative years – and its very hard to shift the mindset to look at things afresh.

    The response by non-Muslims that they (Muslims) have a right to be angry is just an embarrassing case of of pathetic self-flagellation. (The classic dhimmi reaction – and truly awful.)

    Why 9/11? Must have been our awful behaviour in the past. Let’s try to dig up what we did wrong in the past and then go and apologise to these poor people.

    The tiny minority response/excuse? We only need to look at what is taking place in Europe these days. For example, Malmo in south west Sweden where there are areas the police don’t go – soon to be followed by that jewel of the north – Oslo if the good citizens don’t wake up from their deep slumber.

    Change is afoot in western and northern Europe however and I can’t wait for the Dutch elections on 5th June – Geert Wilders will make a big splash – the Dutch have woken up to stealth Jihad – excepting the greens.

    Sooner or later we will have to follow suit.

  6. Reijo, Cecilie et al,

    The call for censorship is the rope by which our detractors try to hang us. The call for censorship, the way Geert Wilders understands it, and with which I agree, is simply based on the fact that Hitlers “Mein Kampf” is banned in some European countries and since the Koran inculcates the same, if not worse genocidal hatred it would only be reasonable to ban the Koran too. Again, this can only be a symbolic ban on printing and distributing this stuff, but there can never be a complete ban, not should there be any snooping or fines for owning one. Even so, a symbolic ban would have significant impact.

    When Gordon Brown opens his mouth, he lies:

    From Express UK:

    Mr Brown sparked the row when he insisted Labour had already acted to tighten controls and would do more.

    “Some people talk as if net inward migration is rising,” he said in his weekly podcast on the Number 10 website.

    “In fact, it is falling – down from 237,000 in 2007, to 163,000 in 2008, to provisional figures of 147,000 last year.”

    But opponents claimed his “hollow posturing” was based on official statistics which have yet to be released. Shadow Immigration Minister Damian Green said: “After 13 years of an open-door immigration policy Gordon Brown now admits we need controls.”

    Migrationwatch chairman Sir Andrew Green said Mr Brown’s figure of 147,000 migrants last year was a “cuckoo”, as it covered the 12 months to June rather than the calendar year.

    He forecast the real figure would be 38,000 more – giving a higher total than in 2008.

    A poster on Express UK posted this:

    Go to Pakistan , Afghanistan . Iraq or Iran illegally. Never mind immigration quotas, visas, international law, or any of that nonsense. Demand a free house, benefits and food.

    B. Once there, demand that the local government provide free medical care for you and your entire family.

    C. Demand that all nurses and doctors be fluent in English, and that all food be cooked according to your specifications in the hospital.

    D. Demand free local government forms, bulletins, etc. Be printed in English.

    E. Procreate abundantly.

    F. Deflect any criticism of this allegedly irresponsible reproductive Behaviour with, ‘It is a cultural thing; you wouldn’t understand.’

    G. Keep your original identity strong. Fly your home country’s national flag from your rooftop, or proudly display it in your front window, or on your car bumper.

    H. Speak only English at home and in public, and make sure that your children do likewise.

    I. Demand classes on English culture in the Muslim school system.

    J. Demand a local country driving license or national insurance number equivalent

    K. This will afford other legal rights and will go far to legitimise your unauthorised, illegal, presence in Pakistan , Afghanistan or Iraq

    L. Drive around with no car tax or insurance and ignore local traffic laws.

    M. Insist that the Police teach English to all its officers.

    N. Organise protest marches against your host country, inciting violence against non-white, non-Christians, and the government that let you in.

    Good luck! You’ll soon be dead..

    It would never happen in Pakistan , Afghanistan Iraq or Iran (or any other country in the world for that matter) except in the:

    UK , US, Canada or Australia,

    Because we are run by soft, politically correct politicians that are too scared to ‘offend’ anyone.

  7. It would be silly to try and ban it, besides being impossible to enforce. In addition our socialistic government would then go ahead and ban any number of other books they felt like.

    By way of example the Roman Catholic Church banned the Bible in the dark ages and tortured and murdered civillian found with a copy (or a part of it). Wasn’t so effective in the long run….. If the Bible were banned today would this stop me believing in it and living by it? Not in the least.

    1. Bat, you obviously did not read what I wrote:

      A ban would be only symbolic, but it would suffice. Unfortunately, our socialistic government already censor just about everything we get our hands on, (the internet seems to be next) but toxic stuff like the Koran is freely distributed, while Islamic hate-preachers are allowed to freely settle in our countries and are on life support from day one. It doesn’t make sense.

  8. Every day hundreds of millions of children are being brainwashed with the Quran. The only way to break the cycle is to take them away from their parents and raise them without it. But how? It will take a giant effort of the West led by the U.S. Study the Winslow Plan at

  9. A ban, by itself, would achieve little. Islamists and their families should be deported en masse! However, people have to band together to fight this, and this means making the politicians listen. This means using your right to be heard in Parliament!! Use It!

  10. In debates about Islam the word Islamophobia is commonly used by our press. Phobia is a mental disease, and to use this is to accuse and intimidate all who state the truth which is sueable. Presently I attack the publishers who use this by stating all Islam’s supporters are Paedophilic Misogynist individuals. If I wasn’t polite I would call them “Child F—ing Woman Haters.
    I have been in contact with a lawyer, to sue all newspapers that use Islamophobia in their articles for millions of dollars, and use the money collected to build safe houses for Muslim Apostates.

  11. Good for you Lorennzo..words have always been the favourite weapons of the socialists/commies etc…they usually bring out a label in their first or second sentence…it is just too easy for them. In the past I have been surprised when experienced journalists in my country have not known how to respond to these labels..All of these labels are designed to stop us in our tracks and of course to stop any further discussion of the topic at hand. These people are the ultimate control freaks…everything is on their terms..
    But as we know on this site muslims are even worse control freaks…
    so all the best in your continuing battle for freedom.

  12. I don’t believe that the koran should banned, I simply state that the koran must be kept exclusively in muslim countries. I don’t care what the hell is written in the koran for the entire book is the figment of the imagination of many perverted freaks. Any non muslim reading this crazy book must be lacking in self confidence. To deliberately lower your self esteem smacks of abject stupidity. The koran is the constitution of the devil for his faithful, adoring followers. The simplest solution is to send all these miserable devil worshippers back to their own countries, then we wouldn’t need to discuss these pathetic date eating, gliding tents ever again.

  13. when I was in my early twenty’s, and a bit put off by the catholic church, I went looking at other religions. In nearly every other faith I found some merit, then i came across islam. Only a lunatic could have composed such a book. God keeps changing his mind, women and boys can be raped, people can be enslaved, nine year old girls can be married and expected to have sex. this book is an insult to humanity and an offence to literature.

  14. Denis,
    the quran is effectively a weapon, designed to enslave uneducated lower IQ people and to make governance of a group easier. It has nothing to do with religion, it has everything to do with conquest and domination.

Comments are closed.