Waad Ramadan Alwan and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi Arrested on Federal Terrorism Charges in Kentucky

WASHINGTON—An Iraqi citizen who allegedly carried out numerous improvised explosive device (IED) attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and another Iraqi national alleged to have participated in the insurgency in Iraq have been arrested and indicted on federal terrorism charges in the Western District of Kentucky.

The arrests in Bowling Green, Kentucky and the criminal complaints and indictment unsealed today were announced by Todd Hinnen, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security; David J. Hale, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky; Elizabeth A. Fries, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Louisville Division; and the members of the Louisville Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF).

Waad Ramadan Alwan, 30, and Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 23, both former residents of Iraq who currently reside in Bowling Green, were charged in a 23-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Bowling Green on May 26, 2011. Alwan is charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals abroad; conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives) against U.S. nationals abroad; distributing information on the manufacture and use of IEDs; attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq; as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles. Hammadi is charged with attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to al Qaeda in Iraq, as well as conspiracy to transfer, possess, and export Stinger missiles.

Alwan and Hammadi were arrested on May 25, 2011, on criminal complaints and made their initial appearances today in federal court in Louisville, Ky. Each faces a potential sentence of life in prison if convicted of all the charges in the indictment. Both defendants were closely monitored by federal law enforcement authorities in the months leading up to their arrests. Neither is charged with plotting attacks within the United States.

“Over the course of roughly eight years, Waad Ramadan Alwan allegedly supported efforts to kill U.S. troops in Iraq, first by participating in the construction and placement of improvised explosive devices in Iraq and, more recently, by attempting to ship money and weapons from the United States to insurgents in Iraq. His co-defendant, Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, is accused of many of the same activities. With these arrests, which are the culmination of extraordinary investigative work by law enforcement and intelligence officials, the support provided by these individuals comes to an end and they will face justice,” said Todd Hinnen, Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security. (Read more.)

Muslim Girl Katya Koren Stoned to Death in Ukraine for Being too Westernized

Katya Koren was stoned to death by Muslims, not in Afghanistan or Iran, but in Eastern Europe. And yet, when I tell people that Western civilization needs to be on guard against Sharia, I'm labeled an "Islamophobic, racist, bigot."

As this story circulates, we'll constantly be reminded that this girl's brutal murder, carried out in the name of Islam by Muslims because she rebelled against Islam, has absolutely nothing to do with Islam.

(Note: The most straightforward justification for executing Katya under Sharia would be on charges of apostasy. But the correct penalty would be beheading, not stoning. Apparently, the Muslims who killed her associated her activities with adultery.)

UKRAINE--A teenage Muslim girl was stoned to death under 'Sharia law' after taking part in a beauty contest in Ukraine.

Katya Koren, 19, was found dead in a village in the Crimea region near her home.

Friends said she liked wearing fashionable clothes and had come seventh in a beauty contest. Her battered body was buried in a forest and was found a week after she disappeared.

Police have opened a murder probe and are investigating claims that three Muslim youths killed her claiming her death was justified under Islam.

One of the three - named as 16-year-old Bihal Gaziev - is under arrest and told police she had 'violated the laws of Sharia'.

Gaziev said he had no regrets about her death because she had violated the laws of Islam. (Source)

Greek Asian Panda coming to defend Islam in five . . . four . . . three . . . two . . .

Jamal Badawi vs. Robert Morey: Is the Qur'an the Word of God?

Anti-Christian Bigotry in Dearborn

Who Was Muhammad?

The Qur’an demands complete submission, not only to Allah, but also to Muhammad:

Qur’an 33:36—It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Apostle, to have any option about their decision: If anyone disobeys Allah and His Apostle, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.

The Qur’an even declares that Muhammad is the ultimate moral example, whom all Muslims should strive to imitate:

Qur’an 33:21—Ye have indeed in the Apostle of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the praise of Allah.

But before we accept everything Muhammad says, adopting him as our supreme moral example, we have to ask ourselves, “Who was Muhammad?”

Over the centuries, and around the world, thousands of people have claimed to be prophets. The problem is that their messages, supposedly revealed by God, often contradict one another. Hence, unless we’re willing to grant that God has Multiple Personality Disorder, we can’t accept what someone says just because he claims to be a prophet. We need to examine such people to see whether we can trust their revelations.

When confronted with someone claiming to speak for God, there are three main possibilities we should consider. First, the person might be getting revelations from his own mind. This doesn’t necessarily mean that he is intentionally inventing things. He may sincerely believe that he is a prophet, and yet his teachings may have a purely human origin. Second, the person might be getting revelations from demonic sources. If demons exist and can influence people, a person who claims to be a prophet could be deceived by demons. Third, the revelation may actually come from God, in which case everyone should submit to it.

In this pamphlet, we will sift through the facts to see if we can determine the origin of Muhammad’s revelations. Did they come from Muhammad’s own mind? Did they come from demons? Did they come from God? Let’s consider the evidence.

I. ALL TOO HUMAN

In many ways, Islam seems like a religion that came from the mind of a caravan trader in seventh-century Arabia. Here we may reflect on various teachings and practices that were present during Muhammad’s time and which became a part of the fabric of Islam. Jewish monotheism had spread into many communities in Arabia, along with biblical and extra-biblical stories about Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David. Peculiar teachings about Jesus and Mary that certain quasi-Christian cults believed in (e.g. Jesus speaking at birth, Jesus giving life to clay birds, Mary giving birth under a palm tree, etc.) had taken firm root in Arabia. The Sabians, who are mentioned in the Qur’an, prayed at all five of the times Muslims pray during their daily prayers. Many of the polytheists of Arabia performed ablutions (ceremonial washings), prayed facing Mecca, took an annual pilgrimage to Mecca, circled the Ka’aba, and kissed a black stone that supposedly fell from heaven. All of these teachings and practices became a part of Islam, which means that Islam is exactly the sort of religion we would expect to arise in seventh century Mecca. So right from the beginning, we have good reasons to think that Islam had a merely human origin—the mind of a man deeply affected by the teachings and practices that surrounded him.

But we have other reasons to believe that the true origin of Islam was the mind of Muhammad. Take, for instance, Muhammad’s self-serving revelations. According to the Qur’an (4:3), Muslims can marry up to four women. But we know from history that Muhammad had far more than four wives. The early Muslim historian al-Tabari says that Muhammad consummated marriages with thirteen women.[1] We also know from references in Sahih al-Bukhari (Islam’s most trusted source on the life of Muhammad) that he had at least nine wives at one time.[2] So if the Qur’an says that men are allowed to have no more than four wives, why did Muhammad get more? As it turns out, Muhammad received another revelation (33:50) which gave him, and him only, special moral privileges—namely, the right to marry more women. Since human beings tend to feed their desires, this looks like a very human revelation.

But 33:50 wasn’t the only morally convenient revelation Muhammad received. The prophet of Islam had an adopted son named Zaid. One day, Muhammad went to visit him and was greeted by Zaid’s wife, Zaynab, who was very beautiful. Muhammad saw Zaynab practically naked, and Muslim sources report that his desire was aroused. When Zaynab found out that Muhammad was attracted to her, she began to despise her husband. Zayd divorced her, and Muhammad married the former wife of his adopted son. This sort of marriage wasn’t allowed at the time, but once again, Muhammad started receiving revelations to justify his behavior (see 33:5 and 33:37). This seems entirely human.

II. SPIRITUAL ISSUES

So we have good reasons to think that the origin of Muhammad’s message was his own seventh century Meccan mind. But we should also look to see if there might be something darker at work. Here we find plenty of evidence suggesting that forces beyond Muhammad were involved in his teachings.

Islam seems to be designed to keep people from believing in the true Gospel. The core of the Christian Gospel consists of three doctrines: (1) Jesus is the divine Son of God, who (2) died on the cross, and (3) rose from the dead. These are the key elements of the Gospel according to the New Testament. Yet we’re also told in the New Testament that false prophets would come, and that they would try to distort this message. Muhammad taught his followers to reject all three doctrines, and this is exactly what Christians would expect if Muhammad was led by something demonic. But is there any additional evidence that Muhammad was susceptible to the influence of evil spirits?

We know from Muslim records that when Muhammad began receiving revelations, his first impression was that he was demon-possessed. We also know that after his experience in the cave, he became suicidal and tried to hurl himself off a cliff. Muhammad’s wife Khadijah and her cousin Waraqah—people who weren’t with him in the cave and had no idea what he experienced—eventually persuaded him that he wasn’t possessed. Instead, he was a prophet of God. But this wasn’t Muhammad’s impression of what he encountered.

Even more startling is that, according to our earliest Muslim sources, Muhammad delivered a revelation from the devil. The story runs as follows. When Muhammad was preaching in Mecca, he didn’t win very many converts. But he wanted his countrymen to accept Islam, and he was hoping to receive a revelation that would help them. Then one day he got the revelation he was looking for. It said,

Have you not heard of al-Lat and al-Uzza
And Manat, the third, the other?
These are the exalted cranes
Whose intercession is to be hoped for.[3]

This revelation was originally part of Surah 53. It said that, in addition to Allah, there are three goddesses that Muslims can pray to: al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat. Muhammad delivered these verses to his followers, he bowed down in honor of them, and his followers bowed down with him. But a little later, Muhammad came back and said that these verses (which he had delivered as part of the Qur’an) weren’t really from God; they were from Satan. The only conclusion to draw from this is that Muhammad couldn’t tell the difference between a revelation from God and a revelation from Satan.

We also know from multiple sources that Muhammad was the victim of black magic that made him delusional and gave him false beliefs. According to Muslim accounts, one of the Jews stole Muhammad’s hairbrush and used it to cast a spell on him. The spell lasted about a year, and it affected Muhammad’s memory and gave him delusional thoughts.[4]

Could demonic powers have been at work in Muhammad’s teachings? Muhammad’s first impression of his revelations was that he was demon-possessed; early Muslim sources report that Muhammad delivered revelations from the devil; a person could give Muhammad delusional thoughts and false beliefs, simply by getting a hair from his hairbrush. Given such clear evidence of spiritual problems, it is extremely difficult to take Muhammad’s claims seriously.

III. A DIVINE ORIGIN?

So we have good evidence that some of Muhammad’s revelations had a purely human origin. At the same time, we’ve seen that something much darker was at work in the formation of Islam. The question before us now is whether we have any good reason to think that Islam is from God. Is there evidence strong enough to outweigh the difficulties we’ve seen? Let’s consider the two most common arguments for the prophethood of Muhammad.

First, Muslims argue that Muhammad’s miraculous scientific insights are proof that his message was from God. The obvious problem with this argument is that both the Qur’an and the Hadith are filled with scientific inaccuracies. In Sahih Al-Bukhari 547, Muhammad tells his followers that if a fly falls into their drink, they should dip the fly into the drink, because one of the fly’s wings has a disease, while the other wing has the cure for the disease. Clearly, flies don’t carry the cures for these diseases on their wings.

Muhammad told his followers that Adam was 90 feet tall, and that people have been shrinking since the time of Adam.[5] Yet it’s physically impossible for a human being to be anywhere near that tall, and we have no evidence that humans have been shrinking since the time of Adam.

The Qur’an tells us that the sun sets in a pool of murky water (18:86), and that stars are missiles that God uses to shoot demons when they try to sneak into Heaven (67:5). In Surah 27, ants talk to Solomon. In Surah 86, we learn that semen is produced between the ribs and the spine. According to several verses in the Qur’an (e.g. 96:1-2), humans come from a clot of blood. All of these claims are scientifically false.

Muslims, of course, are free to reinterpret these passages. But since these passages are much clearer than any supposedly scientifically accurate statements, it’s obvious that Muslim apologists can’t appeal to science as evidence for their faith. Second, the central argument of the Qur’an is found in Surah 2:23, which says, “[I]f you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful.” According to this verse, if a person can’t compose something similar to a chapter of the Qur’an, he must admit that the Qur’an is from God. To see how puzzling this claim is, consider one of the shorter chapters of the Qur’an:

Qur'an 108—Surely We have given you Kausar, Therefore pray to your Lord and make a sacrifice. Surely your enemy is the one who shall be without posterity.

Are we supposed to believe that this chapter is so wonderful that human beings are completely incapable of producing something like it? Such a claim would be absurd. Yet this was Muhammad’s challenge.

Notice also that if we take the Muslim challenge seriously, many things turn out to be inspired by God. I can’t compose symphonies like Mozart’s. Does this mean that Mozart’s symphonies are the inspired music of God? I can’t write plays like Hamlet or Romeo and Juliet. Does this mean that the works of Shakespeare are inspired Scripture? Muhammad’s criterion of truth amounts to “If my poetry is better than your poetry, then my poetry is from God,” and this simply makes no sense.

There are, of course, other arguments for Islam. Nevertheless, many Muslims believe that the two arguments we’ve considered provide their strongest evidence for the prophethood of Muhammad. Even a cursory examination of the evidence, however, shows that these arguments fail miserably.

IV. ASSESSMENT

We’ve seen that Islam looks like a mixture of Jewish teachings, heretical Christian teachings, and pagan practices, and that some of Muhammad’s revelations apparently had no purpose but to satisfy his desires. We therefore have good evidence that certain Qur’anic teachings had a purely human origin. We’ve also seen that Islam seems as if it was designed to keep people from the Gospel, that Muhammad’s first impression of his revelations was that he was demon-possessed, that he admittedly delivered a revelation from the devil, and that he was a victim of black magic. This gives us good reason to suppose that demonic forces were at work in Muhammad’s ministry. While Muslims claim that they have evidence for Islam, their two most common arguments (along with all other arguments for Islam) fail. Since we have no evidence that Muhammad received any of his revelations from God, we can only conclude that Muhammad was a false prophet, and that anyone who wants to follow the truth will have to look somewhere other than Islam.

V. NOTES

[1] According to Tabari, “the Messenger of God married fifteen women and consummated his marriage with thirteen. He combined eleven at a time and left behind nine” (The History of al-Tabari, Volume IX: The Last Years of the Prophet, Ismail K. Poonawala, tr. [Albany: State University of New York Press, 1990], pp. 126-7).
[2] “Anas bin Malik said, ‘The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.’ I asked Anas, ‘Had the Prophet the strength for it?’ Anas replied, ‘We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men).’ And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven)” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Number 268).
[3] See Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah (Life of Muhammad), A. Guillaume, trans. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1955), pp. 165-6.
[4] Sahih al-Bukhari 5765.
[5] See Sahih al-Bukhari 3326 and Sahih Muslim 6809.

Free Speech Victory in Dearborn, Michigan!

Maybe I shouldn't say "in" Dearborn, since the city only sought to suppress free speech in this case. An outside court (the United States Court of Appeals) had to impose Constitutional law on the city.

Dearborn hosts an annual Arab Festival on Warren Avenue. During the festival, the street is reserved, but the adjacent sidewalks are not reserved and therefore remain public property. Hence, prior to 2009, many people would distribute pamphlets, DVDs, CDs, etc., on the public sidewalks. However, when Ronald Haddad took over as Chief of Police, he announced that no one would be allowed to distribute materials on the public sidewalks. Indeed, he insisted that no one would be allowed to distribute materials within five blocks of the festival. (He justified his decision by claiming that he needed to keep the area clear for pedestrian traffic.)

From a Constitutional perspective, this was quite disturbing, as the government was officially limiting free speech on public sidewalks. Moreover, those of us who attended the festival noticed that security only enforced the policy on Christians. Muslims remained free to distribute their materials.

Pastor George Saieg, an Arab Christian from the Sudan (who has observed the effects of Islamic law in his home country and therefore understands the importance of free speech better than many of us) decided to take the case to court. The freedom fighters at the Thomas More Law Center (praise God for them) took the case free of charge, and they won.

Lower courts had ruled in favor of Dearborn (i.e. that Dearborn police could stop people from exercising their freedom of speech on the public sidewalks adjacent to the festival). The appeals court reversed the decision on Constitutional grounds. Here are two excerpts:

On the free speech claim, we REVERSE the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants and its denial of summary judgment to the plaintiffs. We thereby invalidate the leafleting restriction within both the inner and outer perimeters of the Festival.1 The restriction on the sidewalks that are directly adjacent to the Festival attractions does not serve a substantial government interest. The City keeps those same sidewalks open for public traffic and permits sidewalk vendors, whose activity is more obstructive to sidewalk traffic flow than pedestrian leafleting is. Moreover, the prohibition of pedestrian leafleting in the outer perimeter is not narrowly tailored to the goal of isolating inner areas from vehicular traffic. The City can be held liable because the Chief of Police, who instituted the leafleting restriction, created official municipal policy. . . .

The leafleting restriction is not a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction. In the inner perimeter, the restriction does not serve a substantial governmental interest. In the outer perimeter, the restriction is not narrowly tailored. The defendants therefore violated Saieg’s First Amendment right to freedom of speech. Absent an injunction, Saieg will continue to suffer irreparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law. As a result, on the free-speech claim, we REVERSE both the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendants and its denial of summary judgment to the plaintiffs.

Interestingly, the court even recognized that the penalty for leaving Islam is death. They state:

In 2009, Saieg had planned for 90 ACP members to continue the practice of leafleting while roaming the Festival. However, when Saieg shared these plans with a City police sergeant, Saieg learned that the new Chief of Police, Chief Haddad, would not permit anyone to distribute leaflets while walking around the Festival. Instead, the City provided the ACP with a booth, waiving the standard fee. The booth was poorly lit and located by carnival rides, which attracted mostly children. This problem was remedied in 2010, when the ACP’s booth was lit and located “in the central area.” Saieg v. City of Dearborn, 720 F. Supp. 2d 817, 834–35 (E.D. Mich. 2010) (describing then- upcoming plans for the 2010 festival). Saieg also faces a more basic problem with booth-based evangelism: “[t]he penalty of leaving Islam according to Islamic books is death,” which makes Muslims reluctant to approach a booth that is publicly “labeled as . . . Christian.” R. 48 (Ex. A: Saieg Dep. at 75). Saieg believes that evangelism is more effective when he can roam the Festival and speak to Muslims more discreetly. The ACP distributed 37,000 packets of religious materials in 2007 and 20,000 packets in 2008, but only 500 packets in 2009 due to the remote, fixed location. Numbers from 2010 are not in the record. (Click here to read the entire ruling.)

Hence, at the festival next month, police will no longer be permitted to interfere with Constitutionally protected free speech activities. Additionally, the city may now be held liable for damages to anyone whose rights were violated by police at the festivals. That has profound implications for our own case against the city, which is based, in part, on the following incident:



The ruling will also apply to many other people:



I wonder how long the city is going to put up with officials like Chief Haddad, Mayor John O'Reilly, Judge Mark Somers, Prosecuting Attorney William DeBiasi, and others, who apparently have no respect whatsoever for the Constitution, and are responsible for numerous lawsuits against Dearborn. Are the citizens of Dearborn going to continue letting their leaders destroy their city's reputation? Or will they eventually elect leaders who will champion the Constitution and fix the damage that's been done? Only time will tell.

For more on Dearborn, click here.

Now that we're allowed to distribute materials, please support our outreach this year:



***UPDATE*** Thomas More Law Center posted a press release:

The U. S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled today that Sudanese Christian Pastor George Saieg has a free speech right to distribute religious literature on public sidewalks and evangelize Muslims during the Annual Arab International Festival held each year in Dearborn, Michigan.

For five years Saieg, who specifically ministers to Muslims, had been discussing his Christian faith and passing out literature on Dearborn’s sidewalks during the Festival without encountering any problems. Nevertheless, in 2009 police officials informed him he had to remain in a booth, prohibiting him from distributing his literature on the nearby sidewalks and public streets.

Dearborn is one of the most densely populated Muslim communities in the United States. It has the largest Mosque in North America. In the past few years Dearborn has gained national attention for taking a pro-Muslim stance and for the arrest and intimidation of Christian evangelists for engaging in protected speech activity.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national conservative Christian public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, filed the federal lawsuit on behalf of Pastor Saieg in 2009, naming the City of Dearborn and its police chief, Ronald Haddad, as defendants. The case was handled by TMLC Senior Trial Counsel Rob Muise.

In ruling for Saieg, the court recognized the problem Saieg had with booth-based evangelizing: “the penalty of leaving Islam according to Islamic books is death,” which makes Muslims reluctant to approach a booth that is publically “labeled as … Christian.”

Who Corrupted the Gospel?

Muslims often claim that the Gospel has been corrupted. The Qur’an, however, tells us that the Gospel is the Word of Allah, and that no one can corrupt Allah’s Word:

Qur’an 3:3—He has revealed to you the Book with truth, verifying that which is before it, and He revealed the Torah and the Gospel aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Qur’an.

Qur’an 6:115—The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfillment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all.

Qur’an 18:27—And recite what has been revealed to you of the Book of your Lord, there is none who can alter His words; and you shall not find any refuge besides Him.

These verses lead to an obvious question. If the Gospel is the Word of God, and no one can corrupt God’s Word, who corrupted the Gospel? The answer may surprise you.

For nearly two thousand years, Christians have proclaimed Jesus’ death and resurrection. Islam rejects both of these doctrines and offers a different account of what happened at the cross and afterwards. However, the Muslim explanation comes at a terrible price: God is portrayed as a horrible deceiver, and Jesus as the most stupendous failure in the history of the prophets.

According to the Qur’an, Allah not only corrupted Jesus’ message, but also helped Christians spread false teachings. To understand why Islam demands such a view, let us consider seven facts.

FACT #1: The Qur’an states that Jesus was a messenger of Allah and a prophet of Islam. Indeed, Qur’an 19:23-33 tells us that Jesus began preaching Islamic theology shortly after he was born! Jesus continued to preach Islam throughout his life, until he was taken to heaven. According to Qur’an 42:13, Jesus’ message was no different from the message of the prophets before him.

FACT #2: The Qur’an states that Jesus won a number of followers, who were Muslims. Since Jesus spent his entire life proclaiming Islam, his preaching must have centered on the basic tenets of Islamic theology. The Qur’an tells us that Jesus was successful, and that some of his listeners converted to Islam (Qur’an 3:52, 5:111).

FACT #3: In the Qur’an, Allah promises Jesus that his followers would be superior to unbelievers until the Day of Resurrection. Notice that Allah doesn’t say to Jesus, “Sorry, but your disciples will be immediately overpowered by the Apostle Paul.” Instead, Allah promises victory for the Christians:

Qur’an 3:55—Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection.”

Since the Day of Resurrection hasn’t arrived yet, Christians must still be “superior to those who reject faith”!

FACT #4: If there were any first-century Jews who converted to Islam at the preaching of Jesus, they didn’t last very long. The claim that Jesus’ followers were Muslims leads us to ask: Why have we never heard of any Muslims existing in the first century? We have a great deal of historical information about Jesus’ disciples, but we have no evidence at all that any of them believed in Islam. Indeed, the evidence we have tells us that Jesus’ followers believed in his death and resurrection. Defenders of Islam will most likely respond that later Christians wiped out all records of Jesus’ “Muslim” followers (just as I could claim, based on sheer speculation, that Muhammad’s followers were all Christians, but that later Muslims wiped out all records of their Christian beliefs). However, even if we grant such an outlandish assumption, this still presents Muslims with an enormous problem: What happened to these first-century Muslims? Why was their Islamic faith replaced by belief in Jesus’ sacrificial death and resurrection from the dead?

FACT #5: According to Islam, Allah corrupted the Gospel through illusion, deceiving people into believing that Jesus died on the cross. History shows that Jesus’ early followers became convinced of his death and resurrection. Hence, the obvious reason that there were no Muslims after Jesus ascended into heaven is that Jesus’ followers came to believe that he died on the cross and rose from the dead. Where, according to Islam, did they get this idea? The Qur’an tells us that belief in Jesus’ death was caused by Allah!

Qur’an 4:157-158—That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”—But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not—Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.

Based on this passage (and on narrations going back to Muhammad’s companions), Muslims believe that Allah took Jesus to heaven, and then disguised someone else (Judas, according to the most popular interpretation) to make him look like Jesus. This other person was later crucified, but Allah made everyone think that it was Jesus.

Thus, even though Muslims often maintain that the Apostle Paul altered the Gospel, the Qur’an tells us that Jesus’ message was corrupted, at least in part, by Allah himself, who either intentionally or unintentionally originated belief in Jesus’ crucifixion. But Allah didn’t stop there. Instead of correcting the errors he invented, he took Christianity to the next level.

FACT #6: The Qur’an states that Allah helped spread Christianity. Once Allah had deceived countless people (thereby corrupting Jesus’ message), he worked diligently to aid the Christians in spreading their “false” Gospel:

Qur’an 61:14—O you who believe! be helpers (in the cause) of Allah, as [Jesus] son of Marium said to (his) disciples: Who are my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We are helpers (in the cause) of Allah. So a party of the children of Israel believed and another party disbelieved; then We aided those who believed against their enemy, and they became uppermost.

This verse tells us that Allah helped the followers of Jesus against the Jews who rejected Jesus, and that these followers eventually, with the help of Allah, “became uppermost.” So who were these followers of Jesus who became stronger than the Jews? Muslims can’t claim here that Allah helped the “Muslim” followers of Jesus, because even if we assume that such a group existed, they obviously never gained an upper hand over anyone. Indeed, since we have no record of their existence, they must have gone astray immediately. The only Christians who ever “became uppermost” over the Jews were the Christians of the Roman Empire. But these Christians believed in Jesus’ death, resurrection, and divinity, all of which are false doctrines, according to Islam. Hence, if we believe the Qur’an, we can only conclude that Allah helped spread a corrupt version of Christianity!

FACT #7: The Qur’an affirms the Christian Scriptures. When Muslims say that the Bible has been corrupted, they contradict the Qur’an. As we have seen, the Qur’an declares that no one can corrupt God’s Word. Muslims will likely reply that this only refers to the Qur’an (as if Allah somehow acquired the ability to protect his Word after the earlier texts had been altered), but this doesn’t account for numerous clear Qur’anic passages affirming that the Christian Scriptures were available during the time of Muhammad:

Qur’an 5:47—Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) those who rebel.

Qur’an 5:68—Say: “O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.”

Qur’an 7:157—Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (Scriptures)—in the Law and the Gospel— . . . it is they who will prosper.

Amazingly, Muslims tell us not to trust the very Scriptures the Qur’an commands Christians to obey!

QUESTIONS

The seven facts we have examined leave a number of questions unanswered.

• Why would Allah lead Jesus’ followers astray and destroy everything Jesus had worked so hard to accomplish?

• Why did Allah tell Jesus that his followers would be superior to unbelievers until the Day of Resurrection? Didn’t Allah know that he was about to corrupt Christianity?

• If the Gospel was given to man as “guidance,” why didn’t Allah preserve his message (rather than start a heresy)?

• If the Gospel was corrupted in the early centuries of Christianity, why did Allah say that Christians still possessed it during Muhammad’s time?

• If Allah is powerless to stop people from corrupting his message, can we even trust the Qur’an?

• Once the Christian heresy had started, why did Allah help the Christians rise to power?

• If Allah deceives people who follow his prophets, how do Muslims know that he isn’t deceiving them?

Since Allah deceived people about Jesus, and since he couldn’t protect the rest of Jesus’ message, what did Jesus ultimately accomplish?

ASSESSMENT

Muslims boast about their reverence for God and their respect for his prophets. Yet, upon closer examination, we see that Islam accuses God of one of the most heinous religious deceptions ever. Allah leads people astray for no reason, starts false religions, overthrows the work of his prophets, and is powerless to preserve his message.

The Muslim position also suggests that Jesus was the greatest failure in the history of the prophets. Jesus spent his entire life preaching, yet he couldn’t win a single lasting convert, and his “Muslim” followers fell apart so rapidly that they vanished from history.

The true Jesus warned his followers that false prophets would come. He also commanded us not to believe them (Matthew 7:15-20). One of the ways we can spot false prophets is by carefully discerning when their teachings lead to unacceptable beliefs about God. God is Truth, and he is Love. Islam, when carefully examined, would have us believe otherwise.

If we compare Muhammad’s teachings with those of the New Testament, we see a stark contrast. According to the Bible, Jesus voluntarily entered our world to be the perfect sacrifice for sins (Isaiah 53, Mark 10:45, John 10:17-18). The Father was victorious from beginning to end. Jesus was entirely successful in his work. The disciples he chose preached his message fearlessly even in the face of torture and death. Hence, while Islam insults and degrades God and Jesus, Christianity glorifies the Father and the Son.

Who corrupted the Gospel? The facts we have examined leave us with only two options. Either (1) Allah corrupted the Gospel, by producing a false belief in Jesus’ crucifixion, or (2) Muhammad corrupted the Gospel, by changing the message from one of victory and sacrificial love to an absurd tale of a deceptive God and an incompetent Messiah. Since it is impious and immoral to accuse God of pointless deception, we must conclude that Muhammad was a false prophet.

Muslims Discuss the Legacy of Saddam Hussein

Notice that Sam and I never do this on "Jesus or Muhammad."

Dr. S.M. Lockridge: "That's My King"

Tampa Police Covering Up Honor Killing of Fatima Abdallah?

So . . . a Muslim woman who dishonored her family is found dead after her head was smashed into a coffee table. Conclusion? She must have thrown herself into the table. To conclude otherwise would be both racist and Islamophobic. Message to Muslim women? The U.S. government is too politically correct to protect you.

Muslim woman's death questioned by conservative activist: MyFoxTAMPABAY.com

Dearborn Arrests: Unedited Video Footage

Several people have requested unedited video footage of our arrests in Dearborn, to see whether the claims of police and Mayor O'Reilly (e.g., that we we inciting a riot, that we were screaming at people, etc.) are true. The idea seems to be that, even though we obviously weren't committing any crimes in the videos we posted, perhaps we were causing a riot in between scenes. In case there are any doubters, here's unedited footage of our final twenty minutes at the festival. As you can see, nothing important happens apart from what we originally posted. (The footage begins several minutes after the "Roger Williams Incident," which you can view here. Police testified at our trial that we were arrested based on our behavior when they approached us, not based on Williams' complaint. You can see our behavior in the following video.)



How does this video footage line up with Dearborn's story?

Here's Mayor John O'Reilly's version of events:

On Friday, June 18, they behaved very differently than what you saw on film from Saturday, June 19. They were not handing out flyers but were aggressively engaging passers-by in confrontational debate when they were arrested and cited for Breach of the Peace and Failure to Obey the Lawful Order of a Police Officer.

. . .

At the time he was arrested on Friday, June 18, Mr. Wood had gathered a large crowd around him, blocking a key access point between the tents. The crowd was forced to grow bigger solely because people could not pass. Those who created this public danger did so with the knowledge that they were violating the laws because they wanted to be arrested while their cohorts were actively recording the event for posting on the web. They knew that they could inflame the passions of viewers who would be taken in by their misrepresentation of what was really going on. They have even found media that would put them on air to repeat these inaccurate representations without seeking information or the truth from others. (You can read Mayor O'Reilly's letter in its entirety here. Notice that, despite obvious and blatant falsehoods, the Mayor's letter continues to be put forward as fact by the City of Dearborn.)

The City of Dearborn posted its own version of events. Here's the relevant portion:

The police command center received a complaint, from a Christian volunteer working the festival, regarding members of Acts 17 Apologetics harassing and intimidating patrons of the festival and that a large crowd was gathering. Officers responded to the area where, in fact, a large agitated crowd had gathered due to the actions of the individuals of Acts 17 Apologetics.

Public safety became an issue for both members of Acts 17 Apologetics and the gathering crowd. The four (4) members of Acts 17 Apologetics chose to escalate their behavior, which appeared well-orchestrated and deliberate, and chose not to follow the directions being given to them by the responding officers. The behavior of these individuals drew and incited a large crowd to a point where they were in violation of City of Dearborn Misdemeanor Ordinances of Breach of Peace and Failure to Obey the Lawful Order of a Police Officer. They were arrested. Upon their arrest, the crowd dispersed without further action being needed. (The rest of the City's response can be read here. Notice again that the City of Dearborn continues to portray their blatant falsehoods as fact.)

Here's an excerpt from the police report (by Sergeant Jeffrey Mrowka):

As a result of Qureshi screaming into the crowd while uniformed officers were present and the fact that the crowd had increased in numbers and agitation, all three were handcuffed and escorted to the police command post in an attempt to gain control of the situation and avoid a possible riotous crowd.

. . .

Negeen Mayel, Nabeel Qureshi, David Wood and Paul Rezkalla’s actions caused a crowd to gather and become agitated. The weather conditions, hot and humid temperatures, fueled an already agitated crowd. This was evident by the crowd’s yelling profanities and repeated calls to security on the behavior of Mayel, Qureshi, Wood and Rezkalla. When uniformed officers were present Qureshi was yelling into the crowd further inciting the crowd.

Of course, people keep telling me that everything is fine in Dearborn, and that the city is thoroughly dedicated to upholding the U.S. Constitution. The facts say otherwise.

For a complete summary of the events in Dearborn, click here.

Netanyahu, Peace, and Middle Eastern Reality

Sharia in American Courts? Say it ain't so!

Jihad Watch: The nation's leading legal expert on Sharia and its relationship to American law, David Yerushalmi, here tears the cover off the common assertion that anti-Sharia legal initiatives are unnecessary, because Sharia isn't being used in American courts in the first place:

New Study Finds Shariah Law Involved in Court Cases in 23 States CSP

Washington, DC, May 17, 2011 - The Center for Security Policy today released an in-depth study-- Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. The study evaluates 50 appellate court cases from 23 states that involve conflicts between Shariah (Islamic law) and American state law.  The analysis finds that Shariah has been applied or formally recognized in state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy.

Some commentators have tried to minimize this problem, claiming, as an editorial in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times put it that, “…There is scant evidence that American judges are resolving cases on the basis of shariah.” To the contrary, our study identified 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate court published cases.

Others have asserted with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy.  The Center’s analysis, however, found 15 trial court cases, and 12 appellate court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in these particular cases.

The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with constitutional protections.

On the releasing the study, the Center for Security Policy’s President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:

"These cases are the stories of Muslim American families, mostly Muslim women and children, who were asking American courts to preserve their rights to equal protection and due process.  These families came to America for freedom from the discriminatory and cruel laws of Shariah.  When our courts then apply Shariah law in the lives of these families, and deny them equal protection, they are betraying the principles on which America was founded."

Key Findings:

•   At the trial court level, 22 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 15 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level.

•   At the appellate Court level: 23 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 12 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level.

•   The 50 cases were classified into seven distinct “Categories” of dispute:  21 cases dealt with “Shariah Marriage Law”; 17 cases involved “Child Custody”; 5 dealt with “Shariah Contract Law”; 3 dealt with general “Shariah Doctrine”; 2 were concerned with “Shariah Property Law”; 1 dealt with “Due Process/Equal Protection” and 1 dealt with the combined “Shariah Marriage Law/Child Custody.”

•   The 50 cases were based in 23 different states: 6 cases were found in New Jersey; 5 in California; 4 each in Florida, Massachusetts and Washington; 3 each in Maryland, Texas and Virginia; 2 each in Louisiana and Nebraska; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio and South Carolina.

Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases includes summaries of a sample of twenty cases, as well as the full published texts for all fifty cases.

Mr. Gaffney added:

“This study represents a timely contribution to the debate developing around the country:  To what extent is the Islamic politico-military-legal doctrine of Shariah being insinuated into the United States?  The analysis complements and powerfully reinforces the warnings contained in the Center’s bestselling 2010 “Team B II” Report, Shariah: The Threat to America.  It confirms that Shariah’s adherents are making a concerted effort to bring their anti-constitutional code to this country. 

“Together with follow-on analyses now in preparation, we hope to equip those who share the Center’s commitment to the Constitution of the United States, to the liberties it guarantees and to the democratic government it mandates to thwart those like the Muslim Brotherhood who would supplant freedom with Shariah law.  Clearly, we must work to keep America Shariah-free, or risk inexorably losing the country we love.”

The full text of the study, including text from the court cases and tables displaying the findings, can be found at www.ShariahInAmericanCourts.com.

Before His Death, Bin Laden Ordered London Sleeper Cell to Carry out Wave of Terror Attacks

But our president insists that Osama bin Laden wasn't a Muslim leader.

UNITED KINGDOM--A group of terrorists who trained in Somalia returned to Britain to carry out a wave of attacks which were demanded by Osama Bin Laden before his death.

The gang, dubbed the 'London Boys', were taught by a top Al-Qaeda explosives expert in the war-torn country and include Reza Afsharzadegan, a former IT student from Ladbroke Grove, West London.

He is married with a child and moved to Britain as a young boy from Iran.

Leaked documents reveal how the 'sleeper operatives' were trained by an Al-Qaeda official who is wanted by the FBI with a £3m ($5m) reward for his capture.

The IT student and three other men, Mohammed Ezzouek, Hamza Chentouf and Shahajan Janjua, were rescued from Somalia in 2007 after they were imprisoned while trying to flee after the US ordered air strikes on Islamists who took over Mogadishu.

The Foreign Office spent tens of thousands of pounds on a jet to bring them home but the latest revelations will put them under the spotlight once again and raise questions about why they weren't put under further scrutiny.

The news will also send a wave of terror across Britain as security is heightened after the recent death of Bin Laden and ahead of a state visit by U.S president Barack Obama. (Read more.)

Double Honor Killing in India

Islam allows Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women (in order to take over the reproductive capabilities of the enemy and raise their children as Muslims). However, Muslim women are not allowed to marry non-Muslim men. Women who violate this rule are in grave danger.

Notice that these women went to police for help. But police, not taking the threat seriously, sent them home (the way the U.S. media urged the U.S. government to send Rifqa Bary home to her parents).

INDIA--Two Muslim women in an Uttar Pradesh town, 40 km east of Delhi, allegedly killed their daughters because they had eloped and married migrant Bihari Hindu labourers, police said.

The victims had sought police protection after they returned to their homes in Baghpat earlier this week, but the subdivisional magistrate sent them home to reconcile with their mothers.

On Wednesday night, Khatun and Subrato, both of whom are widows, allegedly tied their daughters, 19-year-old Zahida and 26-year-old Husna, to cots and threw a rope around their necks. They then held the girls down and tightened the noose until the victims suffocated to death, police said.

Khatun and Subrato have been arrested. A third woman called Momina, their neighbour in Baghpat’s Muslim-dominated Mughalpura area, who allegedly helped them commit the murders, is on the run.

“We killed them because they had brought shame to our community. How could they elope with Hindus? They deserved to die. We have no remorse,” Khatun and Subrato said Friday. (Read more.)

Losing Our Community

Six Muslims Indicted in Terror Funding Plot

Will the Islamophobia never end? What kind of racist bigots would arrest people for obeying the Qur'an's clear command to "fight those who do not believe in Allah" (9:29)?

LA TIMES--Federal authorities charged three members of a South Florida family, including one arrested in Los Angeles, in a conspiracy to raise money for weapons to "murder, maim and kidnap" people overseas and bolster the Pakistani Taliban.

Three other people in Pakistan, at least two of them related to the Florida family, were also charged.
Authorities say the ringleader of the group is Hafiz Khan, a 76-year-old imam, or religious leader, of a mosque in Miami. He was arrested Saturday by a group of nearly 30 FBI agents who waited until his early morning services were done before taking him into custody.

A 24-year-old son, Izhar Khan, who is also a religious leader at a mosque in nearby Margate, Fla., also was arrested.

Another son, Irfan Khan, 37, was arrested at 3 a.m. in a hotel room in El Segundo. A U.S. citizen born in Pakistan, he lives in Miami. The indictment says that he "is a Pakistani Taliban sympathizer who worked with [his father] and others to collect and deliver money for the Pakistani Taliban."

Officials said the suspects raised up to $45,000 and were linked to the Pakistani Taliban, the group that recruited the would-be Times Square bomber in New York last year.

The Pakistani Taliban also has been deeply involved in assaults against U.S. interests abroad, such as the December 2009 suicide attack on a U.S. military base in Khowst, Afghanistan, that killed seven CIA operatives near the Pakistani border.

The father and sons were being held without bail until court appearances Monday in Miami and Los Angeles, when they are expected to respond to the charges. Three other defendants remained at large, believed to be in Pakistan.

A third son who was not charged, Ikram Khan, sharply denied that his father and siblings were terrorists or tied to any terror organization, and said his father is too old and ill to engage in such activities. He said they had immigrated to the U.S. from Pakistan in 1994.

"None of my family supports the Taliban," he told the Sun Sentinel in Fort Lauderdale. "We support this country."

According to the indictment, the six solicited and collected money and transferred it from the U.S. to supporters of the Taliban in Pakistan. They are accused of using bank accounts and wire transfers to move the funds, with the money intended to purchase guns and other weapons to further the Taliban's militant efforts to overthrow the Pakistani government and attack Americans there.

The indictment specifically charges the six individuals with conspiracy to murder, maim and kidnap people overseas, and with providing material support to a foreign terror organization.

Also charged were three suspects in Pakistan: Amina Khan, a daughter of the alleged ringleader; her son, Alam Zeb; and Ali Rehman. U.S. officials said they are working with their Pakistani counterparts to find them.

Hafiz Khan also was charged with sending additional funds to support an Islamic school he founded and controlled in the Swat region of Pakistan. Federal authorities say he used the school to shelter militants and their families, and to teach the "children from his madrassa [school] to learn to kill Americans in Afghanistan." (Read more.)

Tonight on ABN: Sam Shamoun vs. Inamullah Mumtaz on the Identity of Muhammad

The debate will take place on ABN at 8:00 P.M. (Eastern Standard Time). If you don't get the channel via satellite, you can watch live here.



***UPDATE*** Here's the debate:

Muslim Jihadists Mohammad Mamdouh and Ahmed Serhani Arrested in Attempt to Blow Up New York Synagogue

Seal Team Six killed Osama bin Laden. When all else fails, blame the Jews.

NEW YORK--Two suspected 'homegrown' terrorists have been arrested for allegedly plotting to attack a New York synagogue.

Officers seized the pair, reported to be Mohammad Mamdouh and Ahmed Serhani, as as they allegedly tried to buy guns and grenades in exchange for drugs.

It is the first terror plot uncovered in Manhattan since Osama Bin Laden was killed almost two weeks ago, and will raise fears in a city already on high alert for reprisals.

One of the men allegedly bragged about his plan to attack a synagogue just moments before anti-terrorism officers swooped.

An anonymous source released their names to Fox News.

Mamdouh, of Moroccan descent and Serhani, of Algerian descent, were arrested late last night. Both are U.S. citizens and already had weapons in their possession, police said.

Serhani, in his 20s, has a criminal record for narcotics, and was allegedly trying to sell drugs to fund the gun deal.

According to a police source, both men are 'homegrown' radicalised Muslims of North African origin, a scenario law enforcement officials warned against in the wake of Bin Laden's death. (Read more.)