Criticism of Islam

"To be born again," sang Gibreel Farishta tumbling from the heavens, "first you have to die."

"The history of life was not the bumbling progress – the very English, middle-class progress – Victorian thought had wanted it to be, but violent, a thing of dramatic, cumulative transformations: in the old formulation, more revolution than evolution."

"Martyrdom is a privilege," she said softly. "We shall be like stars; like the sun."

"No, not death: birth."

"Question: What is the opposite of faith?Not disbelief. Too final, certain, closed. Itself a kind of belief.Doubt."

"A poet's work … to name the unnamable, to point at frauds, to take sides, start arguments, shape the world and stop it from going to sleep."

"But names, once they are in common use, quickly become mere sounds, their etymology being buried, like so many of the earth's marvels, beneath the dust of habit."

"Why speak if you can't manage perfect thoughts, perfect sentences?"

"Information got abolished sometime in the twentieth century … Since then we've been living in a fairy-story. … Everything happens by magic. Us fairies haven't a fucking notion what's going on."

"But after a long instant, he [the Prophet] nods. "You have Submitted. And are welcome in my tents.""

"And the Prophet said, "Now we may come into Jahilia," and they arose and came into the city, and possessed it in the Name of the Most High, the Destroyer of Men."

"Mahound shakes his head. "Your blasphemy, Salman, can't be forgiven. Did you think I wouldn't work it out? To set your words against the Words of God.""

"For are they not coinjoined opposites, these two, each man the other's shadow? – One seeking to be transformed into the foreigness he admires, the other preferring, contemptuously, to transform; one, a hapless fellow who seems to be continually punished for uncommitted crimes, the other called angelic by one and all, the type of man who gets away with everything. – We may describe Chamcha as being somewhat less than life-size; but loud, vulgar Gibreel is, without question, a good deal larger than life, a disparity which might easily inspire neo-Procrustean lusts in Chamcha: to stretch himself by cutting Farishta down to size.What is unforgivable?"

"A life illuminated by a strangely radiant death, which continued to glow in his minds eye."

"Do we realise how that hastily-ordered ban has changed India forever? .... When the Government promptly submitted to this illiterate hysteria, it convinced [Hindus] that secularism had become a code phrase for Muslim appeasement."

"One of the reasons for Islamophobia; in 1989 this book was published maligning, ridiculing our Prophet (PBUH). The west could not understand what was the problem. They don’t look at religion the way that we do. And so; in their eyes Islam was an intolerant religion. It became a watershed."

"When the Japanese Rushdie translator was killed (summer 1991), spokesmen of the Japanese Muslim community said: "Whoever has killed him, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, at any rate it was his deserved punishment ordained by Allah.""

"A consequence of the negationist orientation of the Indian state's religious policy, is the readiness to ban books critical of Islam at the slightest suggestion by some mullah or Muslim politician. It is symptomatic that India was the first country to ban Salman Rushdie's The Satanic Verses, at the insistence of Syed Shahabuddin, MP (in exchange, with some other concessions, for his calling off a march on Ayodhya)."

"The Ayodhya dispute and the Rushdie affair are indeed connected. The ban on The Satanic Verses was part of a package of concessions by the Rajiv Gandhi Government to calm down Syed Shahabuddin, who had threatened a Muslim "march on Ayodhya on the same day when the VHP would hold a rally there."

"The author of The Satanic Verses, the British Indian writer Salman Rushdie, was already the acclaimed winner of the 1981 Booker Prize. The Satanic Verses was his fourth book, published in September 1988, about two Indian Muslim immigrants to Britain who die on a hijacked plane that explodes over the English Channel. They fall to earth and are magically transformed into living symbols of good and evil. Their stories are intertwined with that of a prophet called Mahound, in a place called jahiliyya. Rushdie described the book as a work about “migration, metamorphosis, divided selves, love, death, London, and Bombay.” Muslims saw references to their prophet Muhammad and his wives, whose names were given to prostitutes in the book. Khomeini’s edict to kill Rushdie sent shock waves through the literary and publishing world. That same night, Rushdie got police protection and went into hiding. Khomeini had become the spokesperson of Muslims who felt aggrieved and slighted, even those who had not read The Satanic Verses. Six hundred pages and a quarter of a million words long, the book may have been a masterpiece, but it was a maze. Yet someone had gone through it very diligently in India, Rushdie’s native country. And within a month of publication of The Satanic Verses, in the fall of 1988, he had called a friend in Leicester, telling him there was a campaign to ban the book in India, urging him to do God’s work in the UK."

"In Leicester, Faiyazuddin Ahmad, a jovial-looking man, got to work, photocopying extracts of the book and sending them around to Muslim organizations and to the embassies of forty-five Muslim countries in the UK. A recent arrival in the country, Ahmad had previously worked in East Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as a managing editor of newspapers, and was now at the Islamic Foundation in Leicester, a local chapter of the Pakistani Jamaat-e Islami, which received funding from Saudi Arabia. Ahmad, who also had ties with the Saudi-funded World Assembly of Muslim Youth, traveled to Jeddah in October to brief members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation. At the Saudi embassy in London, the head of the Islamic affairs section, Mughram al-Ghamdi, helped set up the UK Action Committee on Islamic Affairs to campaign against the book and get it banned. Only a few Muslim countries answered the call. But by December, British Muslims were protesting, burning a copy as they marched through the small town of Bolton. The subcontinental rivalry between Deobandis and Barelvis was mirrored in the Muslim community in Britain, fueling a competition for bigger and bigger protests. A month later, in January 1989, a larger one took place in Bradford, just an hour away from Bolton. The anger rippled back to the subcontinent. Not to be outdone, the Jamaat organized its own demonstration in Islamabad on February 12, bringing a massive crowd to protest outside the US cultural center in Islamabad. More than eighty were injured, five were shot dead."

"The story goes that Khomeini was watching the news that evening and was moved enough by the deaths of the Pakistani youths that he issued his fatwa. The book had been translated into Persian and had been on sale in Tehran—no one seemed exercised about it until Khomeini spoke out. The Saudis couldn’t let this pass. They went the legal way. Sheikh Bin Baz declared that Rushdie should be tried in absentia to determine whether his book was blasphemous. Sheikh Gad al-Haq, the head of Egypt’s highest religious authority, Al-Azhar, came out against Khomeini’s fatwa. But they were not standing up for freedom of speech and writing, no—Al-Azhar’s view was simply that no one could be put to death before there was a fair trial to determine whether blasphemy had indeed been committed. Any verdict in such a case would have to be handed out by a head of government"

"Rushdie did not stand trial, and he survived the death threats. But the Japanese and Turkish translators of his book, and the publisher of the Norwegian one, were all assassinated for their association with Rushdie. Others with no connection to Rushdie would soon be felled or have their lives wrecked by accusations of blasphemy, from Egypt to Pakistan. Death by blasphemy had now been introduced to the Muslim world by a strange twist in the competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia to position themselves as the standard-bearer of global Islam. But Saudi Arabia’s role in this dynamic would be forgotten, and the fatwa against Rushdie would become solely an Iranian story."

"One prominent Muslim who suffered for The Satanic Verses, notably for protesting against the ban, was Mushir-ul-Hasan, pro-vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, the Muslim university of Delhi. He told an interviewer: "I think the ban should be lifted. I think every person has a right to be heard and to be read." In his view, the ban "qualifies as an indefensible move," though he took care to deny any sympathy for the book's contents. Overnight, he became the object of a vicious campaign by most students and some professors at Jamia Millia. Though he buckled, apologizing and saying he never meant to demand the lifting of the ban, he had to stay away from his own university. The day he showed up again, he was severely beaten up and had to be hospitalized. ... Violence most directly related to Rushdie several attacks on his translators. Two of them, the Italian Ettore Capriolo and the Norwegian William Nygaard, were seriously wounded in knife assaults. (In defiance, Nygaard declared at the 1994 Book Fair in Frankfurt that the only correct reply to the terrorists was to stand firm for freedom, and that his way to do this was to translate and publish yet another blasphemer's book, Taslima Nasrin's Shame.) More alarming yet was the lethal attack on Hitoshi Igarashi, a Japanese professor of literature and translator of The Satanic Verses, right on the campus of Tsukuba University in 1991. To the indignation of the Japanese public, Japanese Muslims applauded this killing and declared that "even if the murder was not committed by a Muslim, God made sure that Igarashi got what he deserved.""

"I am informing all brave Muslims of the world that the author of The Satanic Verses , a text written, edited, and published against Islam, the Prophet of Islam, and the Qu’ran, along with all the editors and publishers aware of its contents, are condemned to death. I call on all valiant Muslims wherever they may be in the world to kill them without delay, so that no one will dare insult the sacred beliefs of Muslims henceforth. Whoever is killed in this cause will be a martyr, God Willing. Meanwhile if someone has access to the author of the book but is incapable of carrying out the execution, he should inform the people so that [Rushdie] is punished for his actions."

"The Press Council condemned the pre-publication of some excerpts as "an aberration from the path of ethical rectitude.""

"Those who oppose the novel most vociferously today are of the opinion that intermingling with a different culture will inevitably weaken and ruin their own. I am of the opposite opinion. The Satanic Verses celebrates hybridity, impurity, intermingling, the transformation that comes of new and unexpected combinations of human beings, cultures, ideas, politics, movies, songs. It rejoices in mongrelization and fears the absolutism of the Pure. Melange, hotchpotch, a bit of this and a bit of that is how newness enters the world. It is the great possibility that mass migration gives the world... The Satanic Verses is for change-by-fusion, change-by-conjoining. It is a love song to our mongrel selves."

"Mr. Mushirul Hasan's innocous opposition to the ban on The Satanic Verses has stirred a hornet's nest. He attempted an apology but could not save himself from the hounds. On May 22, the fire-eating Imam of Jama Masjid declared from the pulpit that "anyone who defends Salman Rushdie is defiling Islam." The students of the Jamia Millia shouted: "Qaum ka gaddar, Maut ka haqdar" (Betrayer of the community, deserver of death). Did Mr. Hasan badly miscalculate? Did he not realise the moral pressures under which he was working? Or, did he think he could brazen it out and earn an instant reputation as a liberal and a progressive without having to pay a price for it? (...) A book like The Satanic Verses is blasphemous and the punishment of its author is death. This was clear from the controversy that followed the banning of the book and the death fatwa by Ayatollah Khomeini against Salman Rushdie. The Muslim world was seized by a paroxysm of hate and demanded his blood. The author had few defenders even on compassionate grounds in his community. Muslims in India were no exception."

"Spring 1989 will always remain as a kind of watershed in intellectual and world history. In February 1989, the Ayatollah Khomeini delivered his infamous fatwa on Salman Rushdie. Immediately following in its wake came short interviews with or articles by Western intellectuals, Arabists, and Islamologists blaming Rushdie for bringing the barbarous sentence onto himself by writing the Satanic Verses. John Esposito, an American expert on Islam, claimed he knew “of no Western scholar of Islam who would not have predicted that [Rushdie’s] kind of statements would be explosive.” That is sheer hypocrisy coming from a man who has published extracts from Sadiq al-Azm’s previously quoted book, that had also dared to criticize Islam."

"I think the man who wanted to kill Rushdie for writing Satanic Verses hasn't read Satanic verses. I think the Islamists who want to kill me for writing books have not read any of my books."

"In light of the recent veiled (ha!) threats aimed at the creators of the television show South Park … by bloggers on Revolution Muslim's website, we hereby deem May 20, 2010 as the first 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!' Do your part to both water down the pool of targets and, oh yeah, defend a little something our country is famous for (but maybe not for long? Comedy Central cooperated with terrorists and pulled the episode) the first amendment."

"Yeah, I want to water down the targets... as a cartoonist I just felt so much passion about what had happened I wanted to kind of counter Comedy Central's message they sent about feeling afraid."

"I make cartoons about current, cultural events. I made a cartoon of a 'poster' entitled "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" with a nonexistent group's name -- Citizens Against Citizens Against Humor -- drawn on the cartoon also. I did not intend for my cartoon to go viral. I did not intend to be the focus of any 'group'."

"I practice the first amendment by drawing what I wish."

"This particular cartoon of a 'poster' seems to have struck a gigantic nerve, something I was totally unprepared for. I am going back to the drawing table now!"

"I said that I wanted to counter fear and then I got afraid."

"It's turned into something completely different, nothing I could've imagined it morphing into. I'm happy some people are talking, because obviously this needs to be addressed."

"As a cartoon, it was mildly amusing. As a campaign, it's crass and gratuitously offensive."

"Depictions of Muhammad offend millions of Muslims who are no part of the violent threats."

"Forget the South Park dust up; forget Everybody Draw Muhammad Day. If you want to see truly shocking anti-religious cartoons, you have to go back to the sixteenth century. Near the end of Luther’s life, his propaganda campaign against Rome grew increasingly vitriolic and his language grotesquely pungent."

"The debate over cartoon depictions of the Prophet Muhammad is often framed as a clash between free speech and religious attitudes. But it is just as much a clash between conflicting religious attitudes, and the freedom at stake is not only freedom of expression but freedom of religion. For while Luther was surely engaging in offensive speech, he was also exercising a right of freedom of conscience, which included the right to dissent from Catholic orthodoxy."

"There is power in numbers, and if you're an artist, creator, cartoonist, or basically anyone who would like to exercise your right to free speech in a way that it is actively threatened, that would be the day to do it."

"No one has a right to an audience or even to a sympathetic hearing, much less an engaged audience. But no one should be beaten or killed or imprisoned simply for speaking their mind or praying to one god as opposed to the other or none at all or getting on with the small business of living their life in peaceful fashion. If we cannot or will not defend that principle with a full throat, then we deserve to choke on whatever jihadists of all stripes can force down our throats."

"Our Draw Mohammed contest is not a frivolous exercise of hip, ironic, hoolarious sacrilege toward a minority religion in the United States (though even that deserves all the protection that the most serioso political commentary commands). It's a defense of what is at the core of a society that is painfully incompetent at delivering on its promise of freedom, tolerance, and equal rights."

"The single most important element–and the thing that ties these selections together–is that each image forces the viewer to do two things. First, they consciously call into question the nature of representation, no small matter in fights over whether it is allowed under Islamic law to depict Mohammed … Second, each of the images forces the viewer to actively participate not simply in the creation of meaning but of actually constructing the image itself."

"There is a deeper lesson here: Connect the dots and discover that we all must be Spartacus on Everybody Draw Mohammad Day. And that in a free society, every day is Everybody Draw Mohammed Day."

"Theo van Gogh was murdered for making a movie critical of Islam. 'South Park' creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone are threatened with the same fate. They deserve our solidarity, and I will stand with them by hosting images of Muhammad on my own website. Please stand with us."

"It is clear that some feel great satisfaction at what they see as 'sticking it to the Muslims'."

"Molly Norris proposed a 'let’s everyone draw Mohammed day' – then, apparently appalled by her own audacity, backed quickly away."

"While the suits at Comedy Central and Yale University Press have been cowed, people across the country have decided to speak up and thereby magnify the offense a thousandfold."

"Everybody Draw Mohammed Day is a chance to reinstate offense and sincerity to their proper place, freed from terror or silence."

"The proper (and, at the risk of looking jingoistic, American) way to combat bad speech is with better speech. To silence and be silenced are the refuge of cowards."

"I realize that in a free society, someone is always going to be doing or saying something that will offend somebody somewhere. I also realize that more free speech, not censorship, is the answer."

"The bottom line is that the First Amendment guarantees free speech including criticism of all peoples. We are an equal-opportunity offense country. To censor ourselves to avoid upsetting a certain group (in a cartoon no less) is un-American."

"In the South Park episode that started all this, Buddha does lines of coke and there was an episode where Cartman started a Christian rock band that sang very homo-erotic songs. Yet there is one religious figure we can't make fun of. The point of the episode that started the controversy is that celebrities wanted Muhammad's power not to be ridiculed. How come non-Muslims aren't allowed to make jokes?"

"These two camps – the Muhammad-knockers and the Muslim offence-takers – are locked in a deadly embrace. Islamic extremists need Western depictions of Muhammad as evidence that there is a new crusade against Islam, while the Muhammad-knockers need the flag-burning, street-stomping antics of the extremists as evidence that their defence of the Enlightenment is a risky, important business."

"Americans love their free speech and have had enough of those who think they can dictate the limits of that fundamental right. [...] Draw to any heart's discontent. It's a free country. For now."

"There’s something here that makes me twitch. I think it’s the 'everybody'. It’s the 'everybody' of a man at the back of a mob, trying to persuade other people to get lynching."

"If a cartoonist wants to satirise Islam by drawing Mohammed, I’m on his side all the way. But among the 13,000 pictures on the EDMD Facebook page, you have Mohammed as a dog in a veil, Mohammed as a pig and Mohammed as a monkey. That’s not resistance, but picking a fight."

"Issuing a death threat against somebody who drew a picture isn’t my thing, but this isn’t either."

"It is likely that institutions will apply more and more self-censorship. Fearing a possible threat, nothing is worse than the fear of fear."

"In a democratic society where free speech is vigilantly protected, it is perfectly reasonable to call out censorship, particularly when it springs from some form of tyrannical religious extremism."

"Whether this succeeds or not, and I have no personal interest in drawing Muhammad, I support the concept. We must join together to stop injustice."

"It defines those others—Muslims—as being outside of our culture, unworthy of the courtesy we readily accord to insiders."

"It attempts to battle religious zealotry with rudeness and sacrilege, and we can only wait to see what happens, but I fear it won’t be good."

"[A] blasphemous faux holiday … [which would] only serve to reinforce broader American misunderstandings of Islam and Muslims."

"The EU agreed to turn Europe into an Arabian Islamic continent, in return for trade essentially"

"there are of course demographic projections from other people, such as at the rightwing blog HonestThinking, who have “with clear logic claimed that Norway […] may have a Muslim majority as early as around 2040 or 2050” (Berg 2007, 52)."

"the statistics cited in Eurabia literature for fertility rates, demographic trends and percentages of Muslims appear, without exception, to be seriously flawed."

"The USA will remain the only superpower. China is becoming an economic giant. Europe is being Islamicized."

"Stripped of its Islamic content, the broad contours of Ye’or’s preposterous thesis recall the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of the first half of the twentieth century and contemporary notions of the ‘Zionist Occupation Government’ prevalent in far-right circles in the US."

"According to current birthrate projections, France will be a majority Muslim country anyway in about 50 years [...] I get a lot of e-mails from Americans who think that Europeans are spineless. And I think they're right."

"Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam. And Italy is an outpost of that province, a stronghold of that colony...In each of our cities lies a second city: a Muslim city, a city run by the Quran. A stage in the Islamic expansionism."

"Sono quattr' anni che parlo di nazismo islamico, di guerra all' Occidente, di culto della morte, di suicidio dell' Europa. Un' Europa che non è più Europa ma Eurabia e che con la sua mollezza, la sua inerzia, la sua cecità, il suo asservimento al nemico si sta scavando la propria tomba."

"Europe is no longer Europe, it is Eurabia, a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not proceed only in a physical sense, but also in a mental and cultural sense."

"According to some, one out of three babies born in France is a Muslim."

"The data that we have isn't pointing in the direction of 'Eurabia' at all"

"Eurabia : The Euro-Arab Axis partage certaines de ses certitudes avec l'extrême droite. L'ouvrage cède allègrement à la paranoïa du complot"

"There is a quite deliberate exaggeration, as has often been pointed out—but the figures are still being cited."

"I think you should have titled your conference the Protocols of the Wise of Brussels [...] I think it's a conspiracy theory."

"Europe will be part of the Arab West, the Maghreb. This is what migration will mean for demography. Europeans marry late and have little or no children. But it has strong immigration: Turks in Germany, Arabs in France and Pakistanis in England. They marry early and have many children. According to the current trends Europe will have Muslim majorities in the population at the end of the 21st century at the latest."

"Mark Steyn for instance wrote a wonderfull book [...] Bat Ye'or of course, a great scholar, a great writer, with famous Eurabia [...] More than half the children in Amsterdam schools are non-Dutch [...] It will happen during our lifetime. This is not the distant future. 11 years until you lose the Netherlands"

"More than any other continent or culture in the world today, Europe is now deeply weighed down with guilt for its past. Alongside this outgoing version of self-distrust runs a more introverted version of the same guilt. For there is also the problem in Europe of an existential tiredness and a feeling that perhaps for Europe the story has run out and a new story must be allowed to begin. Mass immigration — the replacement of large parts of the European populations by other people — is one way in which this new story has been imagined: a change, we seemed to think, was as good as a rest. Such existential civilizational tiredness is not a uniquely modern-European phenomenon, but the fact that a society should feel like it has run out of steam at precisely the moment when a new society has begun to move in cannot help but lead to vast, epochal changes."

"[P]op prophets tell us that Muslims in Europe are reproducing so fast and European societies are so weak and listless that, before you know it, the continent will become "Eurabia," with all the topless gals on the Rivera wearing veils. Well, maybe not. The notion that continental Europeans, who are world-champion haters, will let the impoverished Muslim immigrants they confine to ghettos take over their societies and extent the caliphate from the Amalfi Coast to Amsterdam has it exactly wrong... Muslims are hardly welcome to pick up the trash on Europe's playgrounds. Don't let Europe's current round of playing pacifist dress up fool you: This is the continent that perfected genocide and ethnic cleansing, the happy-go-lucky slice of humanity that brought us such recent hits as the Holocaust and Srebenica... [H]istorical patterns are clear: When Europeans feel sufficiently threatened–even when the threat's concocted nonsense–they don't just react, they overreact with stunning ferocity. One of their more humane (and frequently employed) techniques has been ethnic cleansing."

"Europeans have enjoyed a comfy ride for the last sixty years–but the very fact that they don't want it to stop increases their rage and sense of being besieged by Muslim minorities they've long refused to assimilate (and which no longer want to assimilate)... When Europeans feel sufficiently provoked and threatened–a few serious terrorist attacks could do it–Europe's Muslims will be lucky just to be deported..."

"Europeans have just been better organized for genocide... Far from enjoying the prospect of taking over Europe by having babies, Europe’s Muslims are living on borrowed time... European Muslims can't become French or Dutch or Italian or German. Even if they qualify for a passport, they remain second-class citizens. On a good day. And they're supposed to take over the continent that's exported more death than any other? ... All the copy-cat predictions of a Muslim takeover of Europe not only ignore history and Europe’s ineradicable viciousness and Europe's ineradicable piousness, but do a serious disservice by exacerbating fear and hatred. And when it comes to hatred, trust me: The Europeans don't need our help."

"Picture a French election circa 2020, 2025: the Islamic Republican Coalition wins the most seats in the National Assembly."

"It seems more likely [...] that by 2010 we’ll be watching burning buildings, street riots and assassinations [in EU] on American network news every night."

"I'm a "social conservative." When the mullahs take over, I'll grow my beard a little fuller, get a couple extra wives, and keep my head down. It's the feminists and gays who'll have a tougher time."

"the evidence suggests a third of all births [in France] are already Muslim."

"The analysis is clear, we have a great problem with Islam, in the Netherlands too. The solution is not so complicated; what is missing are political guts and a feeling of urgency. Immigration from Islamic countries should be forbidden. We must learn to be intolerant with the intolerant, in the street, in the mosque and in court. We must answer hatred and violence from terrorists with exclusion and intolerance and show who's the boss in The Netherlands."

"I've had enough of the Quran in The Netherlands: ban that fascist book."

"Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe. If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time. One century ago, there were approximately 50 Muslims in the Netherlands. Today, there are about 1 million Muslims in this country. Where will it end? We are heading for the end of European and Dutch civilisation as we know it."

"People are fed up with the criminality and the taxes they have to pay, which are the result of the islamisation of The Netherlands."

"Immigrants with a double nationality, who commit a crime, such as those many Moroccan street terrorists who are a hazard to the safety of large parts of The Netherlands, they have to hand in their Dutch passport and will leave the country."

"Islam is something we can't afford any more in the Netherlands. I want the fascist Koran banned. We need to stop the Islamisation of the Netherlands. That means no more mosques, no more Islamic schools, no more imams... Not all Muslims are terrorists, but almost all terrorists are Muslims."

"Taqiyya is a well-known term in the Islamic world. It means that muslims who do not live in a muslim country (yet) often don't say everything they really think. But at the moment that the Islamic culture gets stronger there will also be muslims, who are now being seen as moderate, who follow along in the compulsive strictness of the Koran and its ideology. The term comes from the muslim world itself and should therefore not be underestimated. Therefore it is too easy to say that there are enough muslims who participate in our society. It does not say anything about how they are going to behave once there are more muslims represented in The Netherlands... The more dominant the Islamic culture in The Netherlands will be, the more distant we will become from anything that has to do with freedom, tolerance and equality. Because the Islam – in contrast with other religions – will not accept anything else but the Islam. The society will change for the worse. It is no 'clash of civilisations', but a collision between culture and barbarism and retardedness."

"The more dominant the Islamic culture in The Netherlands will be, the more distant we will become from anything that has to do with freedom, tolerance and equality. Because the Islam – in contrast with other religions – will not accept anything else but the Islam. The society will change for the worse. It is no 'clash of civilisations', but a collision between culture and barbarism and retardedness."

"Die lak hebben aan de belangen van de Nederlandse burger en meewerken aan de transformatie van Nederland in Nederabië als provincie van de islamitische superstaat Eurabië."

"In France approximately ten percent of the population are Muslims."

"a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now."

"Enthousiast werkt dit kabinet mee aan de islamisering van Nederland. In heel Europa zet de elite de sluizen open. Nog even en dan is één op de vijf mensen in de Europese Unie moslim."

"Libyan dictator Gaddafi said: "There are tens of millions of Muslims in the European continent today and their number is on the increase. This is the clear indication that the European continent will be converted into Islam. Europe will one day soon be a Muslim continent". End of quote. Indeed, for once in his life, Gaddafi was telling the truth. Because, remember: mass immigration and demographics is destiny!"

"All over Europe multicultural elites are waging total war against their populations. Their goal is to continue the strategy of mass-immigration, which will ultimately result in an Islamic Europe – a Europe without freedom: Eurabia."

"I have a panic room in my house, where I am supposed to take refuge if one of the adherents of the "religion of peace" makes it past my permanent security detail and into my home. In fact, it's not really my home at all—I live in a government safe house, heavily protected and bulletproof. Since November 2004, when a Muslim murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh for the crime of offending Islam, I have been surrounded by police guards and stripped of nearly all personal privacy. I am driven every day from the safe house to my office in the Dutch Parliament building in armored police cars with sirens and flashing blue lights. I wear a bulletproof jacket when I speak in public. Always surrounded by plainclothes police officers, I have not walked the streets on my own in more than seven years... Why do I need this protection? I am not a president or a king; I am a mere member of the Dutch Parliament, one of 150 elected parliamentarians in the Tweede Kamer, the House of Representatives of the Netherlands, a small country of 16.5 million in Western Europe. However, I have joined Westergaard in a rapidly growing group of individuals throughout the world who have been marked for death for criticizing Islam. For asserting our rights to say what we really think about this political ideology that disguises itself as a religion, we have been hounded by Muslims seeking to make an example of us. Offend us, they are saying to the world, and you will end up in hiding like Wilders, attacked like Westergaard, or dead like van Gogh."

"The Dutch example shows that when people overcome their fear, David can defeat Goliath."

"In my fight for freedom and against the Islamization of the Netherlands, I will never let anyone silence me. No matter the cost, no matter by whom, whatever the consequences may be."

"Europe's economic greed was instrumentalized by Arab League policy in a long-term political strategy targeting Israel, Europe, and America. […] Through the labyrinth of the EAD system, a policy of Israel's delegitimization was planned at both the EC's national and international levels. […] Strategically, the Euro-Arab Cooperation was a political instrument for anti-Americanism in Europe, whose aim was to separate and weaken the two continents by an incitement to hostility and the permanent denigration of American policy in the Middle East ."

"Les populations européennes [...] furent, des décennies durant, soumises à une idéologie médiatisée démonisant Israël."

"The truth is that for 30 years the Europeans were with the terrorists. They can’t fight the Arabs; they have allowed the Arabs to dictate their policy since 1974."

"Cet engrenage qui fait de l'Europe le nouveau continent de la dhimmitude, s'est mis en marche depuis 30 ans à l'instigation de la France."

"A machinery that has made Europe the new continent of dhimmitude was put into motion more than 30 years ago at the instigation of France."

"Eurabia is a tangible entity [...] Eurabia’s destiny was sealed when it decided, willingly, to become a covert partner with the Arab global jihad against America and Israel."

"Europeans, prisoners of a Eurabian totalitarianism"

"Eurabia represents a geo-political reality [..] Western Europe [...] future is Eurabia. Period. [...] Generations grew up within this political framework; they were educated and conditioned to support it and go along with it."

"L'Europe est devenue le nouveau continent de la dhimmitude, où on ne livre pas bataille parce que l'on s'est déjà soumis sans se battre [...] Eurabia est à la fois un partenariat avec le monde arabo-musulman et une stratégie menée discrètement, en dehors des traités officiels [...] Les Arabes mirent plusieurs conditions à cette association : une politique européenne indépendante de celle de l'Amérique, la reconnaissance par l'Europe d'un État palestinien, le soutien à l'OLP, le retrait d'Israël sur les lignes d'armistice de 1949, la souveraineté arabe sur Jérusalem."

"I don't see a solution."

"Europeans are not reproducing. Soon, the 60-- and 70--year--olds will die. And there are no Europeans to replace them."

"over the last 30 years, Europeans have lived in a culture of hate and lies directed against Israel, which are expressed in the media from morning to night. It is a continual indoctrination of hate, not much different in its deliberate policy and planning from the 1920-40 period."

"it looks as if the EU has adopted the totalitarian mentality of its best friends and allies"

"Europeans have been unwittingly victims during thiry years of constant indoctrination"

"This Euro-Arab synergy contribued to the emergence of a totalitarian subculture."

"For thirty years now, Europeans have been subjected to a permanent campaign of disinformation"

"It is clear that the EU was creating a gigantic machinery involving politics and cuture in order to condition European minds."

"the totalitarian censorship and control of [European] intellectual life are the foremost result of these dialogues."

"In the news Eurabian totalitarian culture, basic freedoms seems to be dispensable."

"Anti-Semitism has become part of Europe's banal political culture."

"il s'agit [...] d'une culture antisémite élaborée à un haut niveau politique, imposée et distillée quotidiennement [...] aux Européens"

"Depuis trente ans, les Européens sont soumis à une campagne de désinformation permanente"

"[a] process of surrender and moral support to jihadist ideology that is rotting Europe [...] I think that it is, precisely, "Palestinianism" which is at the root of Europe's decadence. [...] Europeans are [...] conditioned by Palestinianism to hate America and Israel"

"I think that European anti-Semitism was created by the European states. It is a culture that has been imposed over the European people in order to develop this anti-Israeli cultural and political war. [...] Europe has built its security system on the hate of Israel, on the hate of America and with the alliance with Arab and Jihadist movements and Palestinian movements."

"For 40 years Eurabia has built its networks, its finance, its hegemonous power, its totalitarian control over the media, the universities, the culture and the mind of people."

"la culture antisémite qui est imposée et diffusée par les "élites européennes" politiques contrôlant par les réseaux eurabiens, les universités, les medias, les publications et la culture [...] Les Européens ne se rendent pas compte de l’ampleur de la toile eurabienne qui touche tous les secteurs : politique, économique, culturel, religieux, médiatique, universitaire, tissé depuis quarante ans."

"Indeed, the freedom of expression and thought that has been so crucial for European democracy has disappeared."

"l’insegnamento nelle università, nella cultura, nell’editoria viene controllato in gran parte dalla Anna Lindh Foundation o dalla Alleanza delle civilizzazioni"

"Ceux qui nient Eurabia sont ceux qui y participent. Car Eurabia se passe de démonstration. Elle est là en nous et autour de nous, ce n’est pas la réalité de demain mais celle d’aujourd’hui."

"a Western world which is corroding, which is [...] Decaying. And which doesn't even reproduce itself. [...] The youth don't get married, don't have children."

"Il a inculqué à l’échelle européenne une culture antisémite"

"L’Europe a choisi la soumission dès 1973"

"Nier l’existence d’Eurabia est stupide"

"L’alliance secrète de chefs d’État européens avec le jihadisme palestinien contre Israël représente la pierre angulaire de la politique euro-méditerranéenne de fusion des deux rives de la Méditerranée. […] Elle promeut la soumission, supprime la liberté d’expression par la terreur et enseigne la conception jihadiste palestinienne de l’histoire et de la civilisation."

"Aujourd’hui ceux qui répandent partout des théories conspirationnistes pour dissimuler et soustraire à la connaissance du public les preuves historiques de la naissance et des accords d’Eurabia font eux-mêmes partie des conspirateurs cherchant à étouffer à tout prix la liberté d’expression."

"l’Europe antisémite et islamisée d’aujourd’hui. [...] L’Europe d’aujourd’hui n’est pas le fruit du hasard. Elle fut voulue par les hommes d’États, les ministres, les économistes, les intellectuels des décennies précédentes."

"L’Europe y consacra des milliards d’euros, finançant une campagne de haine mondiale contre l’État hébreu, l’enveloppant d’un apartheid diplomatique soutenu par le jihad des boycotts. Ainsi orchestra-t-elle le retour en Europe de l’antisémitisme surfant sur la haine d’Israël. Aujourd’hui [...] l’Europe s’emploie à remplacer au plus vite Israël par la Palestine afin que cesse le scandale d’un État hébreu souverain dans sa patrie. Aussi ne serai-je pas étonnée de la voir expédier ses bombardiers de l’OTAN couvrir de feu le sol israélien pour y faire naître la Palestine et remplir ses engagements envers le monde arabe."

"[Les] pays [européens], certaines Églises, l’Union européenne sont parmi les plus grands pourvoyeurs d’antisémitisme au niveau mondial."

"Coloro che mi hanno attaccato sono degli antisemiti e degli antieuropei, islamofili favorevoli all’islamizzazione dell’Europa."

"there are three functional similarities between the two texts [the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis] that supersede these differences in format and intention. [...] Both texts racialize their target population into a unified, coherent and recognizable pack, instinctively acting in unison, and thus sharing fundamental racial characteristics. [...] In both conspiracy theories, supernatural powers are attributed to the targeted population [...] But one of the most striking parallels between the two theories is that the conspiracy is enabled by a European fifth column. [...] one could find other similarities, such as the financial power of the enemy. There is a remarkable parallel between the unlimited resources of Jewish finance, as assumed in The Protocols, and the Arab League’s equally unlimited stock of petrodollars, as is assumed in Eurabia"

"It is a misfortune to human nature, when religion is given by a conqueror. The Mahometan religion, which speaks only by the sword, acts still upon men with that destructive spirit with which it was founded."

"The sword of Mahomet, and the Coran, are the most fatal enemies of Civilization, Liberty, and Truth, which the world has yet known."

"The exaltation of violence; a merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist, such is the man revealed through the quran... Turning to Mahomet, by contradiction, reinforces hate and violence. Jesus is a master of love, Mahomet is a master of hatred... The stoning of Satan, each year at Mecca, is not just a superstitious phenomenon. It not only sets the scene for a rabble flirting with barbarity. Its scope is anthropological. Here in effect is a rite, which each Muslim is invited to submit himself to, emphasizing violence as a sacred duty in the heart of the believer. This stoning, annually accompanied with deaths by trampling of the faithful, sometimes in several hundreds, is a ritual which nurtures archaic violence. Instead of getting rid of this archaic violence... Islam builds a nest for this violence, where it can grow in the warmth... Islam is a religion which, even in its sacred text, as well as in its banal rites, exalts violence and hate... Hate and violence inhabit the book with which each Muslim is educated, the Koran."

"[Islam] from its very birth has used the edge of the sword as a means to convert or conquer those with different religious convictions."

"It is an old dictators' trick to associate criticism with crime and disorder, and too often we have seen secularists reduced to this sleight-of-hand of identifying rational criticism of Christianity and Islam with communal riots."

"Indians may recall that such death sentences against people who have insulted the Prophet, have been carried out earlier this century: against Arya Samaj propagandists Swami Shraddhananda and Pandit Lekh Ram, and against Rajpal, the writer of the Rangila Rasool (more or less Playboy Mohammed). This was a book on the sex life of the Prophet and his wives, certainly insulting, and as a criticism of Islam rather beside the point, but understandable as a reaction against a similar vilifying Muslim pamphlet about Sita. These murders had the desired effect, for the Arya Samaj became less straightforward in its criticism of the Prophet."

"Islam in its origins is just as shady and approximate as those from which it took its borrowings. It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or "surrender" as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing—absolutely nothing—in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption."

"It has had a calamitous effect on converted peoples. To be converted you have to destroy your past, destroy your history. You have to stamp on it, you have to say 'my ancestral culture does not exist, it doesn't matter.'"

"On the other hand, those who founded sects committed to erroneous doctrines proceeded in a way that is opposite to this, The point is clear in the case of Muhammad. He seduced the people by promises of carnal pleasure to which the concupiscence of the flesh goads us. His teaching also contained precepts that were in conformity with his promises, and he gave free rein to carnal pleasure. In all this, as is not unexpected, he was obeyed by carnal men. As for proofs of the truth of his doctrine, he brought forward only such as could be grasped by the natural ability of anyone with a very modest wisdom. Indeed, the truths that he taught he mingled with many fables and with doctrines of the greatest falsity. He did not bring forth any signs produced in a supernatural way, which alone fittingly gives witness to divine inspiration; for a visible action that can be only divine reveals an invisibly inspired teacher of truth. On the contrary, Muhammad said that he was sent in the power of his arms—which are signs not lacking even to robbers and tyrants. What is more, no wise men, men trained in things divine and human, believed in him from the beginning, Those who believed in him were brutal men and desert wanderers, utterly ignorant of all divine teaching, through whose numbers Muhammad forced others to become his followers by the violence of his arms. Nor do divine pronouncements on the part of preceding prophets offer him any witness. On the contrary, he perverts almost all the testimonies of the Old and New Testaments by making them into fabrications of his own, as can be. seen by anyone who examines his law. It was, therefore, a shrewd decision on his part to forbid his followers to read the Old and New Testaments, lest these books convict him of falsity. It is thus clear that those who place any faith in his words believe foolishly."

"So many people can't live their childhood properly because of him [Muhammad]. So many people are sufferers of his disasters. So many people know what's right as wrong and what's wrong as right because they think the darkness that he chose exists. Human emotions and human creations haven't progressed in many ways, because of him.... if there is a God, he's not Mohammed's."

"If the Qur'an was the word of God, it had been dictated on a very bad day."

"May any Muslims who happen to read these lines forgive my plain speaking. For them the Koran is the book of Allah and I respect their faith. But I do not share it and I do not wish to fall back, as many orientalists have done, on equivocal phrases to disguise my real meaning. This may perhaps be of assistance in remaining on good terms with individuals and governments professing Islam; but I have no wish to deceive anyone. Muslims have every right not to read the book or to acquaint themselves with the ideas of a non-Muslim, but if they do so, they must expect to find things put forward there which are blasphemous to them. It is evident that I do not believe that the Koran is the book of Allah."

"In March 1985, two Hindus, Chandmal Chopra and Sital Singh, entered a Writ Petition at the Calcutta High Court alleging that the Koran violated Indian law because it “incites violence, disturbs public tranquility, promotes, on ground of religion, feelings of enmity, hatred and ill-will between different religious communities and insults other religions or religious beliefs of other communities in India.”... Quickly dismissing the petition, Judge Bimal Chandra Basak played the ever-popular “out of context” card, explaining that “some passages containing interpretation of some chapters of the Koran quoted out of context cannot be allowed to dominate or influence the main aim and object of this book. It is dangerous for any court to pass its judgement on such a book by merely looking at certain passages out of context.”"

"While the Koran abounds with sayings which incite violence, insult the religious beliefs of other communities and even exhort the Muslims to kill and murder non-Muslims, the problem is aggravated by yet another fact which has been true in the past and is universally true in our own times, that unlike other communities Muslims are, and even fresh converts tend to become, highly orthodox people and follow the sayings of the book with a fanatical zeal with the result that whichever country has their sizable number amongst its population can never have peace on its soil... The offending expressions contained in the Koran . . . are not so offensive in their translation in which they are so quoted as they are in the original verses in Arabic or in Urdu, the very sound of whose inimitable symphony not only sends the Muslims to tears and ecstasy but arouses in them the worst communal passions and religious fanaticism which have manifested themselves in murder, slaughter, loot, arson, rape and destruction or desecration of holy places in historical times as also in contemporary period not only in India but almost all over the world."

"Some passages containing interpretation of some chapters of the Koran quoted out of context cannot be allowed to dominate or influence the main aim and object of this book. It is dangerous for any court to pass its judgement on such a book by merely looking at certain passages out of context.”... “In my opinion it cannot be said that [the] Koran offers any insult to any other religion. It does not reflect any deliberate or malicious intention of outraging the religious feelings of non-Muslims. Isolated passages picked out from here and there and read out of context cannot change the position."

"Jurisprudence will never be able to find a parallel to the Calcutta High Court's amazing response to such a difficult and dangerous proposition What English judges even today would not dream of entertaining became an arguable case for an Indian judge. Fortunately Justice Binal Chandra Basak who dismissed the matter after the hue and cry forced Government of India to rush the Attorney General to Calcutta ... was quick to see the immense scope for mischief in the petition."

"The way certain chosen passages arbitrarily picked up from the Holy Quran are being used to demonise the Muslim religion is bound to create feelings of ill-will in the society against the second largest section of citizens and thereby disturb social tranquility in the country. What is being overlooked is the fact that the message and spirit of some religious texts can be appreciated only by those who have a certain degree of respect, if not reverence, for them -- those reading such texts with irreverence or hostility can never be at ease with their teachings. And it is indeed true of all religions. Well known is the fact that some of the ancient religious texts of the great Hindu religion are replete with apparently very cruel words and harsh injunctions for the “lower castes”."

"Religious polemics are bitter relics of the past. We cannot afford to revive them in the 21st century India rightly proud of its scientific advancement and technological excellence. If we go on searching each other’s religious texts to find isolated passages which may not appear prima facie palatable to us, it is not going to lead us anywhere. Such passages are things of the past. No one is acting on these now; no one indeed needs to. There is a lot more in all religious texts which can bring us together. We have to concentrate on those refreshingly humane texts and try to come closer – bring all our people closer."

"The Holy Quran – the same Quran in which ignorant critics find a verse which according to their understanding asks Muslims to kill kafirs – after declaring that "Mankind is one single community" [II:213, X:19] pronounces in no uncertain terms: "If anyone kills one person it is like he has slain the whole mankind; and if anyone saves one life it is like he has saved the whole mankind" [V: 32]. And, as regards the much-talked about and misunderstood term "kafir", it is the same Quran proclaiming unequivocally that "For every community God has appointed religious rituals, they must not quarrel in respect of these rituals. [XII: 67]."

"What is indeed more reassuring and thought-provoking in respect of inter-religious harmony is the fact that numerous injunctions in the Holy Quran and the Sacred Vedas are more or less identical in their meaning and message – all teaching their respective followers the same lessons in devotion to the Creator of Universe and mutual love and respect among mankind. "All mankind belongs to God, He rewards all those who are virtuous and punishes all evil-doers" proclaim both the Rigveda [I: 80.11] and the Quran [LIII:31]. Rigveda’s injunction "Pray to God as you wish but with humility and quietness; He does not like those who cross limits" [VI: 16.46 ] finds its exact parallel in the Quran [VII 54-55]. The ancient Indian philosophy of "vasudhev kutumbukam" compares with Islam’s injunction al-khalqu ‘ayalillah [mankind is God’s family]. It is these common teachings of the Hindu and Islamic scriptures, as also the other countless pearls of wisdom found in each of these, that need the attention of members of both the communities – not those which may even be remotely interpreted to be annoying for one community or the other."

"We do not stand for a ban on the publication of the Quran. We take this opportunity to state unambiguously that we regard banning of books, religious or otherwise, as counterproductive. In the case of the Quran, we believe and advocate that more and more non-Muslims should read it so that they know first hand the quality of its teachings."

"Let it be realized by everybody concerned that India has always been and remains, the citadel of the most bigoted and bloodthirsty zealotry of Islam. The historical reasons for why it is so, are many. I do not have the time to detail them here. The main reason may be told. Islam in India has been what it has been because India has continued to stare at Islam as its greatest failure. Islam in India has never been able to relax, as it could do in countries which it converted completely. And it will not relax till Hindus learn to knock out its ideological fangs which are rooted in the Quran."

"The only voice which was heard against this nation-wide exercise in suppressio veri suggestio falsi in the field of medieval Indian history, was that of the veteran historian, R.C. Majumdar. For him, this “national integration” based on a wilful blindness to recorded history of the havoc wrought by Islam in India, could lead only to national suicide. He tried his best to arrest the trend by presenting Islamic imperialism in medieval India as it was, and not as the politicians in league with Stalinist and Muslim historians were tailoring it to become."

"Alas for poor Jadunath Sarkar, who must have turned in his grave if he were buried. For, after reading his History of Aurangzib, one would be tempted to ask, if the temple-breaking policy of Aurangzeb is a disputed point, is there a single fact in the whole recorded history of mankind which may be taken as undisputed? A noted historian has sought to prove that the Hindu population was better off under the Muslims than under the Hindu tributaries or independent rulers.”"

"This caravan loaded with synthetic merchandise has, however, continued to move forward. Eight years later (1982), it was reported that “History and Language textbooks for schools all over India will soon be revised radically. In collaboration with various state governments the Ministry of Education has begun a phased programme to weed out undesirable textbooks and remove matter which is prejudicial to national integration and unity and which does not promote social cohesion. The Ministry of Education’s decision to re-evaluate textbooks was taken in the light of the recommendations of the National Integration Council of which the Prime Minister [Indira Gandhi] is Chairman. The Ministry’s view was that history had often been used to serve narrow, sectarian and chauvinistic ends.”"

"There is plenty of primary literature available in Arabic and Persian regarding the rise, development, and doings of numerous sufi silsilas in India. Some of this literature has been translated into Urdu and English as well. A study of this literature leaves little doubt that sufis were the most fanatic and fundamentalist elements in the Islamic establishment in medieval times. Hindus should go to this literature rather than fall for latter-day Islamic propaganda. The ruin of Hindus and Hinduism in Kashmir in particular, can be safely credited to sufis who functioned there from the early thirteenth century onwards."

"The logic which declares Tengiri to be a satan and denounces Chengiz Khan as an archcriminal but which, in the same breath, proclaims Allah as divine and hails the Ghaznavis, Ghuris, Timurs and Baburs as heroes, is, to the say the least, worse than casuistry."

"Muslims in India have often sought shelter under Sections 153A and 295A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) for preventing every public discussion of their creed in general and of their prophet in particular.1 Quite a few publications which examine critically the sayings and doings of the Prophet or other idolized personalities of Islam, have been proscribed under Section 95 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) as a result of pressure exerted by vociferous, very often violent Muslim protests. Little did they suspect that the same provisions of the law could be invoked for seeking a ban on their holy book, the Quran. The credit for this turning of tables goes to Chandmal Chopra of Calcutta."

"The case had caused considerable excitement among the “believers” (Mu'mins) and interest among the “infidels” (KAfirs) in April-May, 1985. The press in India and abroad gave many headlines to what was rightly regarded as an unprecedented event in the history of religion. It was the first time that a Pagan had questioned the character of a document hailed as the very Word of God by a People of the Book. The roles now stood reversed. So far it had been the privilege of the Peoples of the Book to ban and burn the sacred literature of the Pagans."

"The Telegraph dated May 14 carried a PTI report datelined Islamabad, May 13: “Pakistan’s minister of state for religious and minority affairs, Mr. Maqbool Ahmed Khan, said today that the petition against the Quran moved in the Calcutta high court was the ‘worst example of religious intolerance.’ The Pakistan President. Gen. Zia-ul-Haq, was quoted by an Urdu daily as saying that the facts of the case were being ascertained. Mr. Khan alleged that religion and life and property of minorities were unsafe in India and urged the Indian government to ‘follow the example of Pakistan’ in ensuring freedom of religion....Thus the theocratic state of Pakistan made it an occasion for delivering lectures to Indians on the subject of religious freedom and the rights of minorities. Nobody who was anybody in India at that time is known to have reacted to this assault from an Islamic state which had driven out most of its Hindu minority, and was treating the rest as non-citizens."

"The panic on the part of the State and Union governments could not but produce some more unsavoury results. Muslim mobs in India and elsewhere had been incited by all those who mattered in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. They started taking to the streets and turning violent. The Statesman dated May 13 published the following news date-lined Dhaka, May 12: “At least 12 people were killed and 100 wounded when Bangladesh police fired on a demonstration yesterday in the border town of Chepal Nawabgunj, 320 km. from here. Some 1000 demonstrators, belonging to the fundamentalist Jamaat-i-Islami, were protesting against a case filed by two Indian civilians in Calcutta High Court calling for a ban on the Quran in India. The town chief administrator said today that the police opened fire in self-defence when the demonstrators went on a rampage throwing missiles and setting ablaze government property. Yesterday’s incident followed a demonstration by at least 20,000 Jamaat-i-Islami supporters in the capital on Friday {May 10}.” The demonstrators in Dhaka, according to other reports, were trying to storm the office of India’s High Commission when they were stopped by the police."

"The metropolitan magistrate,... pronounced on 31 July 1986, “With due regard, to the Holy Book of ‘Quran Majeed’, a close perusal of the Ayets shows that the same are harmful and teach hatred and are likely to create differences between Mohammedans on one hand and the remaining communities on the other.”"

"Much water has gone down the Ganges after Lammens wrote in 1929. Islamic Apologetics in India since then has progressed by leaps and bounds. The Quran has been roped in to prove that Islam stands for equality of all religions and religious tolerance."

"The same logic leads to another and a very ominous conclusion. JihAd cannot be regarded as something which happened only in the past. On the contrary, it is an ever-present possibility in India. The Quran will create a jihAd whenever and wherever the “infidels” provide an opportunity. Pious Muslims in every place and at all times, are taught to see, or seek, or provoke situations in which solutions prescribed by the Quran can be practised."

"Starting with the Swadeshi Movement in Bengal, this flattering of Muslims by praising Islam culminated in Mahatma Gandhi’s sarva-dharma-samabhava - the opiate which lulled the Hindus into a deep slumber such as they had never known vis-à-vis Muslim aggression....Anyone who questioned the pious proposition that the Quran was as good as the Vedas and the Puranas, ran the risk of being nailed down as an “enemy of communal harmony”.....That part of the “Muslim minority” which had voted for Pakistan but had chosen to stay in India, restarted the old game when India was proclaimed a secular state pledged to freedom of propagation for all religions. It revived its tried and tested trick of masquerading as a “poor and persecuted minority”. It cooked up any number of Pirpur Reports. The wail went up that the “lives, liberties and honour of the Muslims were not safe” in India, in spite of India’s “secular pretensions”. At the same time, street riots were staged on every possible pretext. The “communal situation” started becoming critical once again. .... And once again, the political leadership came out with a make-belief. The big-wigs from all political parties were collected in a “National Integration Council”. It was pointed out by the leftist professors that the major cause of “communal trouble” was the “bad habit” of living in the past on the part of “our people”. Most of the politicians knew no history and no religion for that matter. They all agreed with one voice that Indian history, particularly that of the “medieval Muslim period”, should be re-written. That, they pleaded, was the royal road to “national integration”."

"Though, by the logic of this tribe, the best promoters of India’s unity were the British. They did far more and succeeded to a much greater extent in imposing a unity on India. By that logic, General Dyer of the Jallianwala Bagh fame comes out with flying colours as the foremost builder of an Indian nation. He was also very ruthless in gunning down unarmed people who were not impressed by the “benefits of the British Raj”."

"It was not so long ago that the Bible enjoyed a stranglehold similar to that of the Quran over vast populations in the West. The theocracies propped up by the Bible in Europe and America had enacted similar sagas of slaughter and pillage for several centuries. But a sustained Western scholarship showed up the Bible for what it was. “It would be more consistent,” proclaimed Thomas Paine, “that we call it [the Bible] the work of a demon than the word of God.” The spell of Jehovah was broken. ... The rest is history. Christianity is now seeking a refuge in countries like India where its rout in the West remains unknown."

"It is only in one respect that the Quran revealed by Tengiri might have differed from the Quran revealed by Allah. It seems that, quite unlike Allah, Tengiri was not intolerant towards revelations other than his own."

"The one name which Muslims hate and fear most is that of Chengiz Khan. He is a spectre which has haunted Muslim historians for centuries. He swept like a tornado over the then most powerful and extensive Islamic empire of Khwarazm. In a short span of five years (1219-1224 CE), he slaughtered millions of Muslims, forced many others including women and children into slavery, and razed to the ground quite a few of the most populous and prosperous cities of the Muslim world at that time."

"The scholars of European Enlightenment who were influenced by Hindu, Chinese, Greek and Roman traditions of spirituality and culture, have judged Jehovah quite correctly and identified him as the main source of darkness which prevailed in Europe during the Middle Ages. But they have so far neglected Allah of the Quran and not weighed him in the same balance of rationalism, humanism and universalism on which Jehovah was weighed and found wanting."