The Traitors Gate

UAF Hunting Club

1. But it is just a small minority of extremists.

People often make a response that they think other people might make. This is true when you’re talking about Islam’s relentless encroachment.

If your listener accepts what you’re saying about Islam, and then they go share what they’ve learned with a friend of theirs, what objection might that friend come up with? Your listener will probably wonder about that, and might bring up that objection to see if you have a good answer for it — a persuasive answer, a satisfying answer, an answer that would even convince their skeptical friend.

If you have a good enough answer, you can go further into the conversation with a willing listener. If you don’t have a good enough answer, the conversation will stall and maybe stop, and your listener’s mind will close, maybe for now, and maybe forever.

Not many people really want to hear about Islamic supremacism, at least at first. It’s ugly and it’s scary. But if you do well enough in your conversation, you can get some good information into the other person’s brain, and we will all be better off. This is the most important thing that needs to be done right now: SUCCESSFUL one-on-one conversations between people who know about Islam and people who don’t.

But, as you have undoubtedly discovered, when you initiate these conversations, people will often respond negatively. The good news is that the number of possible negative responses you get is limited. There aren’t an unlimited number of things people will say to you. There are only six that are very common. My complete list is only 25 objections, and the list covers, by my estimate, 98 percent of all the responses you can possibly get.

People will present their responses as if that’s the end of the argument. Case closed. As far as they are concerned, they just gave the final word on the subject. But if you have a good answer, the conversation can go on, and can go deeper, and your listener will walk away more informed about the third jihad. That’s one less potential dhimmi in the world; one more recruit to our side.

So let’s begin. The first response on our list is: “You seem to be indicting the whole religion. It is really just a small minority of extremists who have hijacked the religion.” Have you ever heard this?

In other words, you’ll be talking about Islam and what it says in the Qur’an, and they’ll come back with, “You’re talking about a minority within Islam.”

This is the biggest misconception people have — that Islamic supremacists are terrorists and they’re small in number and a fringe group, and that the vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, law-abiding, kind-hearted, religiously-tolerant believers in humans rights. How can you respond? Here are a five different ways to answer:

1. Even a small minority of 1.3 billion people is still a lot of people. And the minority is not nearly as small as people like to think. Yes, the number of Muslims following Mohammad’s command to “kill unbelievers wherever you find them” may be small, but a much much larger percentage believes in the political purpose of Islam and is working toward that goal in other ways besides terrorism. There are many ways to wage jihad. Violence is only one. Demographics is another (that is, immigrate to a new country, maybe even let them support you with welfare, but definitely out-breed the original inhabitants, build up a politically-active and powerful voting block of Muslims in that country, and then start pressing for concessions). Many forms of jihad are possible — litigation jihad, forest fire jihad, falsify textbooks jihad, and the list goes on and on. Violent Islamic supremacists may, in fact, be the least of our problems.

2. You mean the ones who are blowing themselves up in order to kill non-Muslims? Or flying planes into buildings? Or trying to get their hands on a nuclear bomb so they can set it off in downtown London or New York? Those are worthy of concern, but in the longer term, the Muslims waging jihad by other means may be more dangerous. (Of course, at this point, they’ll probably say, “What other means?” and you have opened up another opportunity to educate them further.)

3. Jihad is obligatory for all Muslims. Jihad doesn’t mean only violence. Jihad means to struggle, in whatever way you can, to achieve Islam’s single political goal: The subjugation of all non-Muslims to Islamic law. That political goal is a Muslim’s religious duty. Mohammad didn’t approve of meditation or navel-gazing. He said the way you can prove your devotion to Allah is by action. So even mainstream “moderate” Muslims are active, constantly working toward the end-goal of worldwide Islamic dominance. They do it by paying their zakat, which goes to the mosque, which goes to supporting Muslim causes (which are almost entirely political causes). And they do it by having lots of children, to give Muslims a demographic advantage in democratic countries. They do it by making every non-Muslim they meet think that Muslims are harmless and well-meaning. They do it by crying “racism” every time someone criticizes Islam, even though they know full well Islam is not a race (they say it because it gets the desired response: It shuts people up). They do it by writing to every television or radio program that portrays Islam in an unflattering light. It is all jihad. Bamboozling the non-Muslims is jihad. As Mohammad said, “War is deceit.” And as you can see, they have been winning the war. You, like most other non-Muslims, know almost nothing about Islam and yet have a feeling that it must be all right.

4. We get that impression (that it is a small number of extremists) because almost none of the constant attacks by Jihadis are covered in the media. Go to thereligionofpeace.com and you can see every verifiable attack in the world made in the name of Islam. There are about five attacks a day. Some big, some small. But it adds up to a constant war being waged against all non-Muslims everywhere in the world simultaneously. More people are being killed in the name of Islam per year than were killed in the entire 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition. And each one of the Jihadis doing the killing is supported by a network of Muslims that, while they are not killers themselves, help to make it happen, help to finance it, help to hide them, feed them, encourage them, and protect them. And the ones committing violent jihad are only the tip of the iceberg. In many other ways, many more Muslims are following Mohammad’s example and waging jihad on many fronts and at many levels at once.

5. The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest Islamic organization of any kind in the world. That makes it mainstream. Not fringe. The Brotherhood’s goal is to make the whole world submit to Islamic law. And they are actively (and in many ways successfully) accomplishing their goal. Most of them do not advocate random bombings, which are strategically ineffective in most places and counterproductive to the goal of world domination. They have a long-range plan and they’ve been putting it into effect for over twenty years. This is not guesswork. Their documents have been seized in raids. They raise money to promote jihad (while fooling people as to the real purpose of the money), they sue on behalf of Islam, they recruit on campuses and turn non-Muslim students against the UK and America, they influence how textbooks in UK and American schools portray Islam, they fund and control madrassas and mosques all over the UK and America and make sure they teach hatred, intolerance, and non-integration. And more. And they do it all under our noses because our attention is focused out on the hot-headed Jihadis who are blowing things up.

That is our list of good responses — responses that will satisfy most listeners, and allow your conversation to continue productively. Feel free to write in with other possible responses in “comments” below. Let us share our discoveries with each other. Let’s find the best ways to get through to people and prevent our conversations from being stopped by seemingly-sound arguments simply because we were not prepared.

Read over these responses again and pick the one you would most want to use, and remind yourself of it every day until it comes to mind naturally. Or read it onto an audio file and listen to it in your car while you drive. Let’s prepare ourselves for these conversations so they can go well. People who don’t know MUST BE REACHED! It is up to us. Let’s get it done.

Advertisements

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Extremists, Minority | , , | Leave a comment

2. My friend is a Muslim and he’s really nice.

Sometimes when you’re talking about Islam, someone will tell you something like this: “My cousin is married to a Muslim man and he’s a really great guy.” And they will say it like that’s the end of the argument. They pronounce it as if their statement obviously cancels and disproves everything you’ve said about Islam. Here are some possible responses:

1. I can see that you are defending your friend, so let me be clear that I’m not attacking your friend or anyone who calls himself a Muslim. I’m talking about Islamic doctrine. I’m talking about what a devout Muslim is supposed to do, according to Mohammad, and what millions of Muslims in fact do.

2. Is he a practicing Muslim or a Muslim in name only? If he is a practicing Muslim, jihad is obligatory. But keep in mind, jihad means struggling toward the political goal of the dominance of Islamic law. Violence is only one of many ways to work toward that political goal. Also, if he is a practicing Muslim, he cannot be friends with you, according to the Qur’an. He can pretend to be your friend if it serves the goals of Islam, but if he actually feels affection for you and really considers you a friend, he is doomed to burn in hell according to the Qur’an.

3. That’s good (that he’s a really great guy)! But the Muslims following the doctrine still need to be stopped, and one very important thing that needs to happen in order to stop them is for non-Muslims to be educated about what is in the Qur’an and the Hadith. Our fellow non-Muslims need to be made aware of the game plan of the enemies dedicated to destroying our way of life. By trying to stop people like me from educating non-Muslims about Islam, you are actually helping Islamic supremacists with their political goals.

4. Maybe this Muslim’s apparent goodness is only taqiyya. Another possibility is that he is simply ignorant of what his religion really requires of him. I will tell you what is in the Qur’an, but only if you promise not to tell him. We don’t need any more Muslims to awaken to the requirements of their faith. Let him live in benign and peaceful ignorance.

5. He’s a Muslim and he’s really nice? Good! It’s entirely possible he does not follow the whole teachings. However, does he pay his zakat (alms)? Then he is probably contributing to Islamic supremacists who are following the whole teachings. Does he pray five times a day? Does he fast for a month during Ramadan? Has he read the Qur’an? If he had to choose between Shari’a law and the U.S. Constitution, which would he choose? Do you have any idea?! Or are you simply saying your cousin is married to a Muslim with very good people skills?

6. The existence of a nice Muslim does not invalidate the statement that Islamic teachings advocate intolerance and violence toward non-Muslims. The fact that you know a Muslim who knows how to get along with non-Muslims does not mean he would not also advocate imposing Shari’a law on non-Muslims, and does not mean he is not actively striving toward that goal. The fact that he is really nice does not mean he repudiates the supremacist nature of Islamic teachings. The existence of a Muslim who happens to be charming does not discredit a single thing I’ve said.

7. Is your friend an apatheist? If so, I think that’s great. But I wasn’t talking about people who call themselves Muslims but do not follow the doctrine. I’m talking about the actual Islamic doctrine — what it says in their holy books and what nearly all the Islamic authorities have decreed for the last 1400 years — and that is being followed faithfully by Muslims all over the world. Those who are following the teachings of the Qur’an and who faithfully follow Mohammad’s example are a danger to the free world and they must be stopped.

8. Muhammad Salah was a very nice man too. But he was also the leader of the worldwide military wing of Hamas, a brutal terrorist organization!

Give some of these responses a try, and come back here to let us know what happened. Also, please let us know what other questions or statements people make that leave you temporarily tongue-tied.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Muslim friend | , , | Leave a comment

3. What you’re saying is racist.

When I’m talking about Islamic teachings, sometimes people say, “That seems racist.” I usually respond that I’m talking about the teachings, not the person, and that it couldn’t be racist anyway because Islam is not a race. There are Muslims of every race on earth.

I make the point that: “Even if I were to say, ‘All Muslims are evil,’ that’s not racism, either. It would be an overgeneralization, but it’s not racism. If I said, ‘Indonesians are evil,’ THAT would be racism.”

I just came across a story I’m going to keep in mind next time someone accuses me of racism. As the story shows, anyone from any race or country can be a devout Muslim, and if he is following the strict teachings of Islam, he is a threat to any non-Muslim of any race. The story is about training whites in Muslim training camps.

The “racism response” is one of the most common reactions people have when they hear about Islamic supremacism. You and I need to be clear on why our criticisms of Islam are not racism so we can answer effectively.

If I said the tenets, recruitment practices, and indoctrination techniques of the Ku Klux Klan are dangerous to civil rights in America, would anyone call my statement “racist?” Would it be called “hate speech?” Am I suffering from KuKluxKlanophobia?

No, those criticisms would be ridiculous. Rather, my statement that the tenets, recruitment practices, and indoctrination techniques are dangerous to civil rights is a legitimate statement of debate, and there is nothing the matter with stating it openly and talking about it.

But say the same about Islamic supremacism in mixed company and there is an almost audible gasp, and an embarrassed silence, as if you had broken some sacred taboo. Why? The Islamic supremacists themselves have been accusing their critics of racism and hate speech and Islamophobia, and they’ve influenced the mainstream media to do the same, so it has entered the mainstream cultural thought-process. Now, it is an almost automatic emotional reaction.

Islamic supremacists have been using these accusations because they know in this country we have a hot-button on those issues. Nobody wants to be considered racist. The Jihadis use this fact as a weapon.

So we need to carefully and effectively explain to everyone why criticism of Islam is quite different from hate speech, Islamophobia, or racism. Make this distinction clearly and persuasively. People need to hear about Islam, but as long as they have this barrier to their listening, you can’t get through.

Start with the idea that learning about Islam actually prevents racism.

WHEN YOU begin talking about Islam with a multiculturalist, you will immediately run headlong into a wall of resistance. But you can soften their defenses if you immediately make the following perfectly clear:

1. You are against racism, and if people understood more about Islam, it would prevent racism.

2. You are not criticizing Muslims, you are criticizing the political and religious doctrine of Islam.

3. Until your listener has read the Qur’an for herself, she really doesn’t know what’s going on. And if you have read the Qur’an, make it a point to mention that relevant fact.

Work these into the early part of your conversation and you will have a much more willing listener. Listen to me: Multiculturalists are the people we most need to reach. Please do not write them off. These are the people we are not reaching, and there are millions of them. They could be our allies, but their wall must be penetrated. Hammer those three points adamantly up front, and you may well find yourself with an open mind to talk to.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Multiculturalism, Racism, Racist | , , | Leave a comment

4. Aren’t you being religiously intolerant?

Almost everyone in the free world firmly believes in the principle that people have a right to worship as they wish. Even people who are avowed atheists will defend this principle. So to hear anyone (you, for example) criticize any religion offends the sensibilities of people who know nothing about Islam (but assume it is one of many similar religions).

The negative reaction to your criticism of Islam is even more pronounced if they are a believer in another religion because they hear your criticism of Islamic supremacism as a threat to the freedom of religion, and they will often defend Islam on that basis alone.

So how can you respond to this objection? Here are some ideas:

1. I am actually defending religious tolerance. What should you do with a religiously intolerant religion? What can you do with a religion that will try to stop, defeat, undermine, and even abolish all other religions? If you want to preserve religious freedom, you had better keep the aggressive, intolerant religion on a tight leash. You had better be aware of what they’re doing, and you’d better prevent them from getting their hands on the reins of power or it will be the end of religious tolerance.

2. There are two aspects of Islam. One is religious and the other is political. The religious part has to do with fasting and prayer. The political part has to do with subjugating non-Muslims, working to establish Shari’a law in places where it isn’t already established, and repressing the rights of women. Islamic supremacists do not believe the religious part is separate from the political part because according to the Qur’an and the example of Mohammad, they are not separate, and it says in the Qur’an over seventy times that a good Muslim must follow Mohammad’s example.

But some people who call themselves Muslim are perfectly willing to violate the tenets of Islam and separate the two. They only want to practice the religious aspects of Islam, which is private, and I have nothing against that at all. I think they have every right to do that.

But it behooves those of us who might be on the receiving end of their political action to be aware of the political aspects of Islamic teachings. Those teachings impact non-Muslims and restrict human rights for Muslim women, and that isn’t right.

In many places in the free world right now, Muslim women do not enjoy the full rights of freedom because those areas are politically controlled by Islamic supremacists, who never let up on their relentless push for political and legal control. There are areas in Britain, Germany, and France where Shari’a law is legally practiced. The governments have conceded to Islamic pressure. This must be stopped because the pressure for more concessions will never stop. It is a true Muslim’s religious duty to bring the whole world under the rule of Islamic law.

In the USA, Islamic supremacists are influencing American textbooks, misleading students as to the nature of Islam and the history of violent and aggressive Islamic expansion. This is a breach of the separation of church and state, it is an example of Islamic supremacists tireless political aggression, and we must not concede to it. This is not a suppression of religious freedom. It is a repression of unfair, one-sided, freedom-denying political practices (carried out as a religious duty).

3. After the Protestant Reformation, and after many years of persecutions and wars, Britain established a new policy which is the root of our model of religious tolerance today. Any religion or sect could worship as they choose without fear of persecution by the government or anybody else.

Churches that had once enjoyed a monopoly resisted this new policy. They were intolerant of other religions. So Britain told them: You will be tolerant of other religions or you will not be allowed in this country. And if you think about it, this is the only way religious tolerance can work. You can’t allow an aggressive, intolerant religion free reign.

Right now 75 percent of the mosques in America are preaching hatred toward non-Muslims. This is a dangerous religious intolerance. You can’t have everyone allowing everyone else to worship as they wish except one group who will only tolerate their own religion. That’s the definition of supremacism and it is a threat to the freedom of religion. Everyone has to abide by the principle or it doesn’t work. So being critical of Islamic supremacism and stopping its relentless aggressive encroachment is, in fact, an essential goal if the freedom of religion is to survive.

Those are three answers to the accusation that you are being religiously intolerant. I invite you — no, I urge you, I challenge you — to come up with an even better answer and add it to the comments below. Let us continually outdo one another with better and better responses.

I also encourage you to add your two cents about which answer we come up with is the best. Add your vote as a comment below.

Minds need to be changed, and it is right here that we can make it happen. Let us arm ourselves with effective weapons in this war of ideas. Let us forge the weapons here that will help us win the war against Islam’s relentless encroachment and protect our freedom.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Religiously intolerant | , , | Leave a comment

5. Christianity is just as bad.

When you criticize Islamic supremacism, a very common response you’ll get is something like this: “Christians do the same thing. Look at the Inquisition. Look at the Crusades. More people have been killed in the name of Christianity than all other religions combined.”

A simple way to answer the objection is: “Today, more people are killed in the name of Islam every year than were killed in the entire 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition.” Direct your listener to see how many people are being killed daily in the name of Islam at TheReligionOfPeace.com. Memorize that URL so you can recommend it. Write it down for them. It is a site that documents every verifiable act of jihad in the world where at least one person is killed.

Another answer is: “In the 1400-year history of Islam, 270 million people have been killed in the name of Islam. No other religion even comes close. Communism doesn’t even come close. Naziism doesn’t either. The reason we don’t know this is that Islamic supremacists have infiltrated the textbook publishing business in America and have massively edited the history of Islam. They also heavily influence Western media.”

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Christianity | , , | Leave a comment

6. Not all Muslims are terrorists.

When you talk about Islamic supremacism, people often respond as if you’ve made some sort of mistake, as if you are equating a few crazy terrorists with all 1.3 billion Muslims in the world, when “everybody knows” most of them are peace-loving people.

This is an easy objection to answer, but it is also an opportunity to give your listener a deeper education on the subject. Here are a few ideas of how to answer this objection:

1. Terrorism is only one of many ways to wage jihad. There are at least ten types of jihad (I recommend you memorize this list). In Islamic teachings, there are five pillars of Islam, five things every Muslim should do. But according to Mohammad, jihad is more important than any of them. It is a religious duty for each Muslim to struggle for the establishment of Sharia law everywhere in the world. Some do it with bombs. Some do it with immigration and fecundity. Some do it with relentless political actions (waging jihad by gaining concessions). Some do it with “mainstream, moderate” Muslim organizations that try to undermine Western governments. So in other words, I agree with you completely that not all Muslims are terrorists, but I disagree with you that this somehow implies Islamic supremacism is something we can safely ignore. We need to know about it or we will have no ability to protect ourselves from it.

2. That’s true: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims, and they kill in the name of Islam. Do you know why? Do you know what they’re after? (When they say something like, “Yes, they want the West to stop interfering with Islamic affairs,” Since the beginning, Muslims have waged a war of expansion, and they have tried to justify their violence as a response to a grievance. That’s the way Mohammad did it, and he’s the example all Muslims forever after are supposed to follow. They want only one thing: For everybody on earth to submit to Islamic law. Fighting toward this goal is a religious duty for Muslims. And terrorism is only one of many ways to wage jihad.

3. That’s true, but most Muslims believe Mohammad is a good example to follow. They believe this because it says over seventy times in the Qur’an that every Muslim must follow Mohammad’s example. Do you know anything about Mohammad? Knowing about Mohammad explains a lot of what otherwise is incomprehensible about what is going on in the world. (Here you can tell the story of Mohammad’s rise to power and the change in the Qur’anic revelations. Talk them into reading the Qur’an. Recommend a readable version like this one: An Abridged Koran.)

4. The Muslims who are terrorists are able to do what they do because of a tremendous amount of support from their community, and that support is motivated by Islamic teachings. It is also motivated by the hope that the supporters will gain entry to Paradise. The martyr can plea to Allah (once he arrives in Paradise) on behalf of up to seventy of his relatives to get them a ticket to Paradise. For those who believe this, it is a tremendous incentive to help any of their relatives who plan on killing non-Muslims. In other words, that “small percentage” of Muslims who are active terrorists are only the tip of the iceberg of a tremendous amount of popular support for the killing of non-Muslims. Remember the jubilation throughout the Muslim world when thousands of non-Muslims were killed on 9/11? Only 19 hijackers did it, but clearly millions supported it. Millions. Maybe hundreds of millions. Why? Because that’s the kind of thing Muslims are supposed to do according to the Qur’an and the “perfect” example of Mohammad.

Make your arguments as cleanly and as calmly as you can. Try to be almost casual about it. Never be intense if you can help it. Understate rather than overstate your case. Speak accurately. Never exaggerate.

We must successfully persuade people. We cannot afford to fail. Make your conversations count.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Muslims Terrorists | , , | Leave a comment

7. We can’t go to war with 1.3 billion Muslims!

This objection is not usually spoken out loud, but it’s a central fear lurking behind much of the resistance you get when you talk about Islam.

When you’re talking to people, you want them to accept the simple fact that Islamic teachings are very straightforward, and they call for intolerance and violence toward non-Muslims and an unrelenting effort to make us all submit to Shari’a law.

They will put up every objection they can think of because they don’t want to accept this premise.

If they articulated their fear, it would sound something like this: “For God’s sake, that CAN’T be true, because it would mean we would have to go to war with 1.3 billion Muslims, and we can’t do that!” Some people actually say it out loud.

Like many of the objections, this one is a great opportunity to insert a little more information into a brain that is likely almost entirely empty of any facts about Islam. Here are some possible responses you can give:

1. Luckily, we don’t have to go to war with all of them. Most of the people who are now Muslims never chose to be so. Their ancestors were almost all forced to be Muslims. The whole country was conquered and Shari’a law was imposed. Shari’a puts pressure on everyone to be Muslim, and not just in name only. It is against the law to skip the five prayers a day or skip fasting during Ramadan or skip paying zakat (alms to the mosque). In other words, the practice of Islam is enforced by law, so after a few generations, it would be hard to think outside of being a Muslim, especially when the penalty for leaving the faith is death.

But what this means is that many of them would choose to live their lives without the constant domination of Islam if they had the option. So even if it came to war, we wouldn’t have to go to war with 1.3 billion.

2. What would you go to war to do? I mean, why would you think a war would be necessary?

3. We don’t need to go to war, we only need to change some of our own laws and some of our own foreign policies. And sometimes we wouldn’t even have to change them, we would only need to start enforcing them. For example, it is against the law to try to overthrow the government or to even plot to do so. It is sedition. It’s already against the law. And yet in three out of four mosques in the UK, jihad is being preached.

Jihad means “the struggle to make everyone on earth submit to Shari’a law.” It is an essential element of Islam. It is a core tenet. This isn’t some fringe teaching that nobody cares about. This is a central purpose of Islam. If we want the Muslims in our country to stop working to undermine and overthrow the government, we will have to make a distinction between the political aspects of Islam and the religious aspects of Islam, and we’ll have to stop people from committing sedition. We do not need to go to war. We only need to educate enough non-Muslims so that no more politicians ignorant of Islam are voted into office. The one thing that needs to happen is education.

4. The problem is not with Muslims, so we don’t have to go to war with them. The problem is not even with Islamic doctrine. Our problem is the abject ignorance of the majority of non-Muslims. Because of this ignorance, the West is conceding its freedoms. Let me give you an illustration to clarify what I mean:

On the comments on an article about sociopaths, most of the commenters are victims of sociopaths, and they tell their stories about what happened to them — they were conned out of their life savings or they were married to someone who abused their children or one of their parents deliberately drives them crazy, etc. But two of the people who comment are themselves sociopaths, and their comments illuminate an important principle.

The point of view of most of the victims is that they don’t understand how sociopaths can be so mean or cruel or heartless. The point of view of the sociopaths is that they don’t understand how normal people can be so naive as to trust everyone, so foolish as to never protect themselves from someone who has already proven to be dangerous, or so stupid as to sign over the deed to their house!

Same with non-Muslims dealing with Islam. Okay, so it is a Muslim’s duty to strive for the political goal of establishing Shari’a law throughout the world by any means necessary. That’s what they do. But we don’t have to allow it! They are only making progress toward their goal because we let them. We trust them. We make treaties with them. We allow them to immigrate. We make assumptions about them (like they must be just like us, their religion must be similar to other religions we know of, etc.). We are conceding our freedoms. We are forgoing our own self-preservation. We are voluntarily giving away our ability to defend ourselves.

The problem is not with them, it’s with us. We don’t need to go to war. We need to stop being stupid, and that can’t happen until more people know about Islam.

Most of the people commenting on that sociopath site said they were surprised to find out there was even such a thing as a sociopath. The phenomenon of “everyday sociopaths” is not very well known. People know about psychopathic serial killers, but most people don’t know there is such a thing as people walking around in ordinary lives who have no empathy for others and cannot develop it, people whose only goal in life is to win and dominate, people who feel no pity or remorse and who have no emotional conflict when they are cruel.

Some people who tell their sad tales were married to a sociopath for years without ever realizing such a person could exist, so they were totally frustrated, anguished, and confused by their spouse’s behavior, and of course, in their ignorance they made one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another.

The free world is doing the same thing with Islam’s relentless, self-serving aggression — making one stupid, self-defeating mistake after another. The stupidity must stop. The only thing missing is enough people who have at least a passing familiarity with basic Islamic teachings.

Okay, that’s four possible answers to the objection, “But we can’t go to war with a billion Muslims!”

January 25, 2011 Posted by | War | , , | Leave a comment

8. Are you an Islamophobe?

The number one thing that needs to happen is for a far larger percentage of the population to know some basic information about Islamic supremacism.

We need your help. You have a sphere of influence. It may be forty people; it may be two hundred. But whatever your sphere of influence, we’re going to try to help you be more effective at teaching your fellow non-Muslims some basic facts about Islam.

When you mention anything that sounds critical of Islam, most people will try to defend it, even if they know nothing about it. If you are unprepared for the hostile response you get, you will not make any gains toward the goal.

The purpose of this blog is to help you deal with those responses successfully.

I recommend you study this material. Maybe even make an audio recording of the articles and listen to it in your car. When you’re trying to educate someone and he brings up an objection like this, you should be overly prepared — so prepared that the objection doesn’t bother you even a little bit. I want you to be so prepared that you are actually glad they gave you an objection you know how to answer so masterfully.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Islamophobe | , , | Leave a comment

9. Isn’t this bigotry?

When you say anything negative about Islamic doctrine, one of the responses you’ll typically get is an implication that you are a bigot. If you ever hear this, your first response should be to define “bigot.” Most people don’t really know what it means. They only know it is a bad thing and has something to do with racism.

A bigot is “strongly partial to his own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.”

So someone who is a Christian, for example, and is intolerant of anyone who is not a Christian, is a bigot. Or anyone who is Chinese and intolerant of anyone who is not Chinese, is a bigot. If the group to which you are partial is your race, then bigotry is the same as racism. If that’s what you’re accused of and you are not a racist, we’ve got some good responses to the racism accusation here. If you are accused of religious bigotry and it’s not true, we have some good responses to the “religious intolerance” accusation here.

There are definitely people trying to stop Islam’s relentless encroachment who are motivated by bigotry. But criticism of Islamic doctrine is not bigotry.

You can answer the bigotry objection very simply. First, define it. And then say, “I am partial to groups who want to support the continued existence of the UK (or the United States, or wherever you are). So I guess in that sense, I am a bigot — I am partial to a group and intolerant of subversives. I don’t want our government overthrown or subverted by someone who wants to follow Shari’a law. I am against any movement trying to take away women’s rights, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, which is what Islamic supremacists are doing.”

And maybe you can add something like this: “But if that can be defined as a bigot, I hope you are that kind of bigot, too. Are you?”

The real objection of someone who fears you are a bigot is that you are against everyone if they are not of your religion, your race, or your political persuasion. And that you might be intolerant of such people simply because of those things.

Is it true? Do you believe that your way is the only right way? Are you intolerant of anyone not like you?

Do you believe others have a right to worship as they wish? Do you believe people of other races have the same human rights as yours?

If you are a Republican and you have Democrat friends, if you are a Jew and have a Buddhist, Hindu, or Christian friend, if you are Anglo-Saxon but have a Mexican friend, you are not a bigot. And if your accuser says so, you can point out these things and then get back to the real issue: The doctrine of Islam, our right to criticize it, and the danger it presents to the free world.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Bigot, Bigotry | , , | Leave a comment

10. Are you a hatemonger? I don’t believe in promoting hatred.

When you criticize Islam, you may very well be accused of being a “hater,” as if telling people about basic Islamic doctrines means you advocate hatred toward Muslims as the solution. And nobody likes a hater, or wants to be one.

This objection is fairly easy to answer. Here are three possible ways to respond:

1. Hatred is not the answer. If anything, I am anti-hatred. That’s why I am trying to expose Islamic teachings: Shari’a law includes a system of legally-mandated hatred. Mohammad is their model, and he expressed hatred toward non-Muslims. He maligned them, robbed them, tortured them, killed them, raped them, and took them as slaves. Muslims are supposed to follow his example. It says so in the Qur’an over seventy times.

2. I’m talking about the teachings, not the people. Some Muslims follow the teachings, and some are Muslim in name only. But non-Muslims need to know about the teachings, because many of the most fundamental Islamic teachings are about how to deal with non-Muslims. According to the teachings, we must be subjugated under Islamic law. All of us. Voluntarily or by force. And the tens of millions or hundreds of millions who follow Islamic doctrine to the letter are actively working toward that end. They have gained control over how Islam is taught in UK schoolbooks. Devoted followers have set up organizations in the UK and other Western democracies with the express purpose of undermining those democracies from within. We need to know about this stuff. It is affecting us already.

3. If I say the teachings of communism advocate ending economic inequalities, does that make me a hatemonger? If I say Republicans advocate smaller government, does that make me a hater? If I say Buddhists believe in reincarnation, does that make me a hater? But if I say the teachings of Islam advocate striving to institute worldwide Shari’a law, that makes me a hatemonger? That doesn’t make any sense. Where did you come up with that?
WHEN YOU answer these questions, think of the question itself as an earnest request for knowledge, even if the question comes out as an accusation. People don’t really know how to understand what you’re doing, so they use the only model they can think of to interpret your actions: They think you must be like a racist or a religious bigot or something along those lines.

So a helpful response is to give them a better model to interpret with. What you’re doing is much closer to education than hatemongering. Urge them to read the Qur’an for themselves to find out more about it.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Hate, Hatemonger | , , | Leave a comment

11. You should really talk to some Muslims. You’re getting all this from books.

This objection seems sensible if you haven’t had time to think about it, but it is meaningless — unless, of course, you’ve just made the blunder of overgeneralizing (saying something like, “All Muslims treat their women badly”) — in which case, you should immediately correct yourself by talking about Islamic doctrine rather than talking about “Muslims.”

But assuming you are making no such blunders, here is a possible answer to this objection:

“I have talked to Muslims. And I’ve met some very nice Muslims. They are either ignoring some of the basic, mainstream Islamic teachings or they are using taqiyya (read more about taqiyya), which is the Islamic principle of “religious deception” or deception for the sake of Islam.

“But hopefully, they were simply genuinely nice people who are ignoring some of their religious principles. You see, if a Muslim is truly a friend to me (a non-Muslim), he or she is violating an important doctrine of Islam: A Muslim is forbidden to befriend a non-Muslim. I’m not making this up. It’s in the Quran and it’s stated very clearly.

“But either way, it doesn’t change the fact that the doctrine of Islam is hazardous to non-Muslims and we should learn about it. Sixty-one percent of the Quran is about how Muslims are supposed to deal with non-Muslims. Millions of Muslims around the world are devout believers in that doctrine.

January 25, 2011 Posted by | Books, Muslims | , , | Leave a comment