Islam: Religion of Peace?

Dr. Thomas Ice

Most of you have most likely heard the recent public declarations coming from all quarters that Islam is a peaceful religion. From ex-President Bush, to most religious leaders, to the average American calling in to a talk radio program, we are hearing that Islam is a peaceful religion. It is said that the late Osama bin Laden and the Taliban represent an extremely radical Muslim fringe that is not really a representative interpretation of true Islam. It may be that such an assessment is, to a small degree, more extreme than historic Islam. However, it is certainly not true that Islam is in any way a peaceful religion, especially toward outsiders.

Islam Means Submission

First of all, we should know that Islam means “submission,” not peace. This does not imply mere voluntary submission but includes a forced submission where subjects will not comply. Historically Islam is not known for its peace movements, but for a uniquely Arab word we all know as “jihad,” which means an offensive war intended to lead to the conversion of the infidel to Islam or his annihilation. Dave Hunt notes:

Islam is fighting a holy war for control of the world! That war was begun by Mohammed himself in the seventh century and is still carried on today by his faithful followers through terrorism. The terrorists are not radicals or extremists, as the media continually labels them. Instead, these are Islamic fundamentalists who are true to their religion and the teachings of the Koran and who follow faithfully in the footsteps of their great Prophet, Mohammed. As one former Muslim and Islamic scholar has said:

We must never imagine that such Muslims are being unnecessarily wicked. They are simply being faithful to their religion. The fact is never hidden as to the attitude a good Muslim should have towards Christians and Jews. In fact, much of the incitement to violence and war in the whole of the Quran is directed against the Jews and Christian who rejected what they felt to be the strange god Mohammed was try to preach. (Emphasis added.)

It appears that the fundamentalists versions of Islam are closer to historic Islam than those who are followers of so-called modern “mainstream” Islamic expressions. Non-fundamentalist Muslims are the ones who have changed historically and moved away from the historic Islam. I will provide more information supporting this claim throughout the remainder of this article.

Islam’s Global Jihad

In an excellent book, written by a convert from Islam to Christianity, Abd El Schafi has documented from the Koran and widely accepted Muslim scholarship that Islam has always been and continues to be a religion spread by force, not through peaceful means or persuasion. His book, Behind The Veil: Unmasking Islam is the work of a team of Christian converts from Islam that base their research and conclusions on the work of nothing but mainstream Muslims, both ancient and modern, from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and other Middle Eastern Islamic countries.

El Schafi says,

Muhammad and his successors initiated offensive wars against peaceful countries in order to impose Islam by force as well as to seize the abundance of these lands. Their objective was to capture women and children and to put an end to the poverty and hunger from which Arab Muslims suffered. So, Islam was imposed upon Syria, Jordan, Palestine (Jerusalem), Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, all of North Africa, some parts of India and China, and later Spain.

 

For those familiar with Muhammad’s rise to power will also realize that Islam rose to the fore as a result of military conquest upon the so-called “holy land” of the Arabian Peninsula. El Schafi adds the following information about the militant nature of historic Islam in the following:

Undoubtedly, the concept of an offensive war to spread the faith is a genuine Islamic concept; it is known as a Holy War for the sake of God. We will see what Muslim scholars have explicitly determined that this is the essence of Islam. They also indicate that if sufficient military power is available to Islamic countries, they ought to attack all other countries in order to force them to embrace Islam (as well as all the Caliphs who succeeded him) called for holy wars. All scholars and lawyers acknowledge that.

Direct Quotes from the Koran

Anyone with even a casual acquaintance with Islam knows that the Koran is the authoritative scripture for the Muslim. Yet observe the many direct quotes from the Koran advocating militancy toward the non-Muslim. There are probably more that could be cited, but these are some that this novice was able to glean from Islam’s Holy Book.

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them. And seize them, beleaguer them. Lie in wait for the in every stratagem of war; but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Surah 9:5)

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, even if they are of the people of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with will submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Surah 9:29)

Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive and struggle with your goods and your persons, in the Cause of Allah. (Surah 9:41)

The infidel is to be “killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land . . . and in the hereafter theirs will be an awful doom.” (Surah 5:33)

Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth no aggressors. And slay them wherever you find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out. . . . But if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving, merciful. (Surah 2:190-92)

Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day. . . . Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! ( Surah 2:29, 41)

Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who reject the faith do battle for the cause of evil. So fight ye against the friends of Satan. (Surah 4:76)

Muhammad and the Origin of Islam

It should not be surprising in the least to those familiar with the Koran and those with a knowledge of the genesis of this militant religion, that Islam was planted by Muhammad with the sword, not a philosophy or ethic of peace. El Schafi provides the following synopsis of the bloody beginnings of the Islamic religion:

Even the Muslim reader will be astonished to learn how cruel and brutal Muhammad was as he tortured his captives with fire, then killed them and took their wives as bond maids and wives for himself as well as for his companions. Had anyone dared to write defamatory poetry about him, the poet would have been assassinated whether a centenarian or a nursing mother. . . .

Following Muhammad’s death, his companions fought each other in relentless, savage wars. Competing for authority and out of deeply rooted hatred, Muhammad’s relatives and closest friends sacrificed and slaughtered on another. . . .

All these historical facts are agreed upon by all Muslim scholars and historians according to the references which will be mentioned in detail.

No wonder that we see Moslems these days fighting with each other. In fact, these wars and hostilities spring from the heart of the teachings of Islam since it calls for the use of force to combat wrongdoing, as Muhammad’s relatives did with one another. It was Muhammad who said that “whoever sees an abomination must straighten it with his hands.”” Saddam Hussein repeated and relied upon this saying of Muhammad in his attack on Kuwait’s ruling family. Muslim brotherhood in Egypt depended upon this saying when they killed Anwar El Sadat.

Muhammad founded Islam with the sword. His followers maintained Islamic rule with the sword. Subsequent generations have always spread Islam’s oppressive rule beyond the Arabian Peninsula with the sword. One cannot be a true follower of Islam without holding to the tenants of the Koran, which also advocates forced submission to its rule. How can anyone who knows much about Islam deny this?

Secular Westerners

Why are so many in the United States and the West inclined to want to believe that Islam is a peaceful religion and not the militant movement that desires to conquer the world through Jihad? In general, it is most likely because of liberal enlightenment beliefs that dominate their mindset. Just as liberals change Christianity from something that includes the literal Word of God in the Bible that has occurred literally in history to the words of man that contain human ideas and universal human ethics. Western Muslims are often “liberal,” by Middle Eastern standards, in their interpretations of Islam. Just as liberal “Christians” deny direct biblical statements and reinterpret Christianity as something that they want it to be, so also do Muslims, primarily in the West. It is only in this way can anyone could attempt to represent Islam as a peaceful religion.

Obviously there are political motives behind President Bush and his administration that have given rise to their many statements that Islam is a peaceful religion. Yet such is simply not the case. If our American administration is going to truly defeat Islamic terrorism, they are going to have to face the fact that it is driven by a historic Muslim belief in holy war as a means of spreading their religion.

Conclusion

Biblical Christianity does not advocate the use of the sword to spread its message of forgiveness from sin by faith alone in Christ alone. The Bible advocates propagation of its message through the preaching of the gospel and verbal persuasion. Of course, Christians have the secret weapons of prayer and the Holy Spirit that works behind the scene in conjunction with the preaching of the gospel.

Is Christianity a religion of peace? Christianity is a religion of peace to those who come to know the grace of God through belief in the gospel message. Christianity is a peaceful religion in that Scripture does not advocate the spread of its message in any way through the sword, but with words only. However, the Bible clearly does teach that God, not mankind, will judge those who reject the gospel message of Jesus, His Son. Paul says the following in 2 Thessalonians 1:6-10: “For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. And these will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed-for our testimony to you was believed.” Maranatha!

Obama Muslim Connection

Report: Obama said ‘I Am a Muslim’

By Pamela Geller

“The American President told me in confidence that he is a Muslim.”

That was the claim of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, as reported in the May 2010 issue of Israel Today. According to journalist Avi Lipkin, Gheit appeared on Nile TV’s “Round Table Show” in January, on which he said that “he had had a one-on-one meeting with Obama who swore to him that he was a Moslem, the son of a Moslem father and step-son of Moslem step-father, that his half-brothers in Kenya were Moslems, and that he was loyal to the Moslem agenda.”
Obama allegedly said this in the context of reassuring Gheit that he would soon deal with Israel:

He asked that the Moslem world show patience. Obama promised that once he overcame some domestic American problems (Healthcare) [sic], that he would show the Moslem world what he would do with Israel.

Could this be true? Even if Gheit’s claim isn’t true, or was misreported, every country in the free world must be cognizant of the catastrophic sea change that has taken place in the leadership of the free world — as witnessed by events over the past year. Barack Obama took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, and yet whether he is a Muslim or not, he has undeniably gone around the world promoting Islam and Sharia (Islamic law).
And now, if what Gheit says is true, we know why.
The alleged exchange between Obama and Gheit would almost certainly have happened in early January 2010, when Gheit was in Washington, D.C. regarding “Mideast peace talks.”
On Thursday, January 7, 2010, the Associated Press reported that “Clinton and Mitchell [were] scheduled to meet” with Gheit on Friday, January 8, 2010: see ABC news here.
On Friday, January 8, 2010, Hillary Clinton and Gheit spoke with each other. The U.S. Department of State has provided video before the meeting: see the Department of State here.
On Saturday, January 9, 2010, NPR spoke with Gheit about his visit: see NPR.org.
This is a devastating claim, and yet no media outlet is covering it. Remember, during Obama’s campaign, I and others were excoriated for using his middle name. We were accused of implying he was a crypto-Muslim. We could not discuss his background, his Islamic schooling, his ties to Islam. However, I have meticulously documented his Muslim background in my soon-to-be-released book,The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America.
It became all too clear after his election how proud Obama was of his Muslim name, background, and family. He made this plain when he gave his very first interview to Muslim media and boasted of these things. He suddenly became proud of the very things that were verboten to speak of during the campaign. That was the level of deceit and obfuscation.
If Gheit’s reported claim is true, then Obama is a baldfaced liar. But why? Why lie if you have nothing to hide?
Of course, if Obama believes himself a Muslim, then his prior behavior constituted taqiya — deception or lies to advance Islam. This he performed brilliantly during his election: He lied with brazen contempt. And now his Islamic Jew-hatred is made painfully clear in his stunning rebuke of Israel. In Israel Today, political analyst Aviel Schneider exposes some of the further implications of Gheit’s claim:
That could explain why Obama has instructed that the term “Islamic extremism” no longer be used in official government documents and statements. Furthermore, the US is now accusing Israel of harming American interests in the Middle East. General David Petraeus, the head of US Central Command, said Israel’s intransigence on resolving the conflict with the Palestinians is endangering US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even the US Congress considers Obama’s behavior toward Netanyahu humiliating. Three-quarters of the House of Representatives, 337 of 435 members, signed a bipartisan letter to Clinton expressing “deep concern over recent tension” between the two countries, and demanding that it be smoothed over quickly and in private.
“Obama is a real problem for Israel,” a senior official told told Yediot. “He is Israel’s biggest strategic catastrophe.” The newspaper also quoted another official who believes that for the first time Washington has switched sides. “The Obama White House is putting pressure only on Israel but does not expect anything from the Palestinians,” he said. “These American demands are unacceptable.”
Is it any wonder that Obama’s counterterror adviser speaks Arabic, calls Jerusalem “Al-Quds,” and calls jihad a “legitimate tenet of Islam”?
We know that Gheit met with Obama in April 2010 in D.C. — check out White House.gov, which lists Gheit as one of the attendees of a “Nuclear Security Summit” at that time. And they met more than once. Gheit had a private meeting with Obama in May 2009.
Worse yet, Gheit just last month called Israel “the enemy.” This after Israel gave them the Sinai (which Israel had won in a defensive war and defended through another one) with all its oil in return for “peace.”
How plausible is Gheit’s reported claim about Obama? Let’s review Obama’s track record:
And earlier this week, Obama became the first president to host a press conference with theAmerican flag nowhere in sight.
Ouch. What a disgrace.
Now: will the lapdog media make Obama address Gheit’s claim?
The American people deserve answers. But whether or not what Gheit reportedly says is true, Obama’s pro-jihad track record is clear.

Pamela Geller is the editor and publisher of the Atlas Shrugs website and former associate publisher of the New York Observer. She is the author of The Post-American Presidency (coming July 27 from Simon & Schuster).

The Beast Empire and Prophetic Symbolism from Israel

Bill Wilson

The media covering the Occupant of the Oval Office’s trip to Israel is prophetic symbolism, probably unbeknownst to them. Certainly, the news media is like most people and some pastors in that they do no know the Bible or what they know of it is steeped in error. Such is the case where the media missed the irony in one of the first stories emanating from the Holy Land. The Occupant’s six ton armored Cadillac nicknamed “The Beast” sputtered to a stop between Ben Gurion Airport and Jerusalem. “The Beast” was totally disabled and had to be hauled away because it seems one of the entourage filled it with diesel fuel instead of unleaded. Most think it’s a funny story, unless you know the rest of the story.

The Beast Empire rules the Middle East prior to the return of Jesus Christ. It is led by the Beast, also known as the antichrist. When Jesus returns, he meets the beast in the Jezreel Valley, where the final battle of Armageddon will see the defeat of the beast. Revelation 19:19-20 says, “And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse (Christ), and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.”

Another analysis written by AP discusses Israeli settlements as the core of the conflict between Israel and the surrounding Arab nations and their terrorist proxies such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Fatah. Fatah is the military faction of the so-called moderate Palestinian Authority, formerly the terrorist group Palestinian Liberation Organization. The story points out that the settlements are on war-won land. Certainly, the land is a symptom of what is at the core of the Middle East strife. The truth, however, is found as early as Genesis 3:15 when YHVH God told the serpent (satan), “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

Years later, we see another prophecy in Genesis 16:12 of Ishmael, “And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” Ishmael’s seed grew into a great multitude, the Arabs and Islam. All the nations mentioned in the Bible as coming against Israel in the final Day of the Lord are Arab-Islamic. They are trying to drive Israel from the land God gave it, and destroy the seed of the woman. While the land is the physical core of modern strife in Israel, the spiritual reasons for the lack of peace are already written. As Paul writes in 2 Corinthians 4:3-4, “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world has blinded in the minds of them which believe not…” And know you know the rest of the story.

Have a Blessed and Powerful Day!

Bill Wilson
www.dailyjot.com

 

PS. Please use the forward link below to pass this on to as many people as you can!

Hitler, Healthcare, Guns and Bonhoeffer’s Voice of Opposition

Hitler

The head of the National Socialist Workers’ Party, Adolph Hitler, became Chancellor of Germany, January 30, 1933, and began implementing a plan of universal healthcare, with no regard for conscience.

The New York Times reported October 10, 1933:

“Nazi Plan to Kill Incurables to End Pain; German Religious Groups Oppose Move…

The Ministry of Justice…explaining the Nazi aims regarding the German penal code, today announced its intentions to authorize physicians to end the sufferings of the incurable patient…in the interest of true humanity…”

The New York Times continued:

“The Catholic newspaper Germania hastened to observe: ‘The Catholic faith binds the conscience of its followers not to accept this method.’…In Lutheran circles, too, life is regarded as something that God alone can take…

Euthanasia…has become a widely discussed word in the Reich…No life still valuable to the State will be wantonly destroyed.”

When Germany’s economy suffered, expenses had to be cut from the national healthcare plan, such as keeping alive handicapped, insane, chronically ill, elderly and those with dementia.

They were considered “lebensunwertes leben”-life unworthy of life.

Then criminals, convicts, street bums, beggars and gypsies, considered “leeches” on society, met a similar fate.

Eventually, to rid the human gene pool of what Nazi’s considered “untermensch” -under mankind, Hitler’s immoral plan sent 6 million Jews, along with millions of others, to the holocaust gas chambers and ovens.

U.S. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop stated in 1977:”When the first 273,000 German aged, infirm and retarded were killed in gas chambers there was no outcry from that medical profession…and it was not far from there to Auschwitz.”

British Journalist Malcolm Muggeridge explained:

“We have…for those that have eyes to see, an object lesson in what the quest for ‘quality of life’ without reference to ‘sanctity of life’ can involve…

The origins of the Holocaust lay, not in Nazi terrorism…but in…Germany’s acceptance of euthanasia and mercy-killing as humane and estimable.”

The German Reichstag (Capitol building) was set on fire under suspicious conditions, after which Hitler forced old military leaders to retire.

He accused political opponents, then had them arrested and shot.

An SA Oberführer warned of an ordinance by the provisional Bavarian Minister of the Interior:

“The deadline set…for the Surrender of Weapons will expire on March 31, 1933. I therefore request the immediate surrender of all arms…

Whoever does not belong to one of these named units (SA, SS, and Stahlhelm) and…keeps his weapon without authorization or even hides it, must be viewed as an enemy of the national government and will be held responsible without hesitation and with the utmost severity.”

Heinrich Himmler, head of Nazi S.S. (“Schutzstaffel”-Protection Squadron), stated:

“Germans who wish to use firearms should join the S.S. or the S.A. Ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.”

When a suspected homosexual youth shot a Nazi diplomat in Paris, it was used as an excuse to confiscate all firearms from Jews.

German newspapers printed, November 10, 1938:

“Jews Forbidden to Possess Weapons By Order of SS Reichsführer Himmler, Munich…

‘Persons who, according to the Nürnberg law, are regarded as Jews, are forbidden to possess any weapon. Violators will be condemned to a concentration camp and imprisoned for a period of up to 20 years.'”

The New York Times, November 9, 1938, reported:

“The Berlin Police…announced that…the entire Jewish population of Berlin had been ‘disarmed’ with the confiscation of 2,569 hand weapons, 1,702 firearms and 20,000 rounds of ammunition. Any Jews still found in possession of weapons without valid licenses are threatened with the severest punishment.”

In his early political career, Hitler said he was Christian, but once in power he began to reveal his nazified social Darwinism beliefs and became openly hostile toward Christianity.

Of the Waffengesetz (Nazi Weapons Law), March 18, 1938, Hitler stated at a dinner talk, April 11, 1942 (Hitler’s Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, 2nd Edition, 1973, p. 425-6, translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens):

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing…

So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt stated of Hitler, December 15, 1941:

“Government to him is not the servant…of the people but their absolute master and the dictator of their every act…

The rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness which seemed to the Founders of the Republic inalienable, were, to Hitler and his fellows, empty words…

Hitler advanced: That the individual human being has no rights whatsoever in himself…no right to a soul of his own, or a mind of his own, or a tongue of his own, or a trade of his own; or even to live where he pleases or to marry the woman he loves;

That his only duty is the duty of obedience, not to his God, not to his conscience, but to Adolf Hitler…

His only value is his value, not as a man, but as a unit of the Nazi state…To Hitler, the church…is a monstrosity to be destroyed by every means.”

Some Church leaders resisted Hitler, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

Bonhoeffer, born FEBRUARY 4, 1906, studied in New York in 1930, where he met Frank Fisher, an African-American seminarian who introduced him to Harlem’s Abyssinian Baptist Church.

He was inspired by African-American spirituals and the preaching of Adam Clayton Powell, Sr., who helped Bonhoeffer turn “from phraseology to reality,” motivating him to stand up to injustice.

Bonhoeffer helped found the Confessing Church in Germany, which refused to be intimidated by Hitler into silence.

In his book, The Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer rebuked nominal Christians:

“Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline. Communion without confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ.”

Bonhoeffer stated in a 1932 sermon:

“The blood of martyrs might once again be demanded, but this blood, if we really have the courage and loyalty to shed it, will not be innocent, shining like that of the first witnesses for the faith. On our blood lies heavy guilt, the guilt of the unprofitable servant.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer warned Germans not to slip into the cult of Führer (leader) worship, as he could turn out to be a Verführer (mis-leader, seducer). Bonhoeffer challenged:

“To endure the cross is not tragedy; it is the suffering which is the fruit of an exclusive allegiance to Jesus Christ”

Source: http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs155/1108762609255/archive/1112359410347.html

Results of Islamic Multiculturalism: A Muslim Woman’s Account of Abuse, Rape and Threat of Execution as Normal Way of Life in Iraq

Another reason we MUST OPPOSE Multiculturalism at ever level! The Islamic Beast is rising (Psa 83; Dan 7-12; Rev 11-19)

 

Akeela Hayder Green

Muslims are pouring into the US at an alarming rate.  Most of them are coming in as legal immigrants and some are using the unprotected US-Mexico border to enter illegally.  As the number of Muslims increase, so does their influence in politics and law.  More and more we are hearing incidents of sharia law usurping American laws.

Muslims repeatedly tell us that they are a religion of peace and they have no intention of changing America.  But when you look at some of their largest enclaves, like Dearborn, Michigan, you’ll see that they are changing laws and the ways of life here in America.

But do you really have any idea what life in a Muslim country is like, especially for the women?

Akeela Hayder Green was born and raised in England.  Her father was from Iraq and when Akeela was only 13 years old, he sent her to visit relatives in Iraq.  He told her it was for a short time, but she later found out that he has sent her back for much longer and that she was to learn the Muslim ways.

At age 15, she was sold off into marriage to a man she didn’t know.  She said living with him was like being raped repeatedly.  Before her marriage, she was not a virgin and Muslim custom dictates that if a bride is a not a virgin that she is to be killed publicly to preserve the families honor.  When her aunt found out, they took her to a doctor who sewed up part of her vagina to simulate that she was a virgin.  The proof is that on the wedding night, the bride has to bleed onto a white cloth and then the next day, the cloth is passed around before family and friends as proof her purity.  Fortunately for Akeela, the surgery worked and she bled on her wedding night as the complete stranger that was now her husband raped her.

Eventually, she talked her husband and Iraq family to allow her and her husband to return to England to visit her father.  As soon as they arrived, she took off and left her husband.  That is another affront to the Muslim way of life and again placed her life in jeopardy of a possible honor killing.

Listen to her compelling story and then ask yourself if this is what we want America to become like.  Sharia law is a horrible law that allows men to treat women as a possession and not a person.  Women have no dignity, no freedom, and no hope under sharia law.

%d bloggers like this: