Category Archives: Explaining Islam

There may not be a lot in this interview this audience doesn’t already know. But Mordechai, having perfect fluency in Arabic and decades with Israel’s equivalent of the NSA, makes him someone worth listening to. I hope you share this interview with others who might have become receptive to the dangers of Islam in the West recently.

Accompanying article at RAIR Foundation.

Not long after the invention of the modern Internet and tools like search engines and YouTube became practical, it occurred to me that schools should probably be eliminated more or less altogether and replaced with teaching children up to about the age of 14, the use of logic, reason, and determining the value and validity of information and then cutting them loose to learn on their own from materials online.

As the educational system becomes more and more captured by enemies of civilization, that idea is more and more appealing. Trump was right to eliminate the Dept. of Education, if indeed he did, and as Stephen Coughlin asserts, Ronald Raegan’s greatest failure was not keeping his promise to eliminate the dept. of education. In Canada at this point we fully replaced education with indoctrination.

The clip below is from 2012 and is a phenomenal example of Islamic sophistry. I posted it to the VTB Substack and asked people to treat it like a game and point out some of the fallacies he used. I will post the responses so far, which are very good, under the video. First my text:

For anyone who may have read G. K, Chesterton’s stellar work on the Islamic dominance of Great Britain in 1914, yes 111 years ago, they would have noticed Chesterton’s phenomenal grasp of Islamic sophistry. The kind of pretzel logic Muslims often use to sell the unsellable to the rationally challenged.

This video is so chock-a-block full of logical fallacy one could make a board game out of it. ‘See how many you can spot’ sort of thing.

I’ll start you off with a few examples. But see if you can pick off any yourselves and put them in the comments.

This example may not exactly be sophistry but it certainly speaks to classic Islamic deception.

The imam claims that both men and women would be stoned to death for the crime of adultery, and therefore, it is equal rights for men and women in a manner of fashion.

But men can have 4 wives and take as many infidel sex slaves as he wants and would not be guilty of adultery, whereas a woman who has any form of sex whatsoever with anyone not the designated husband (I say designated husband because quite often in Islam, marriage is forced on women) is guilty of this capital offence.

So the statement is in itself ludicrous. Personally I am not aware of any situation in which a man was killed by any means for adultery under sharia law. But one might see a situation where had he had sex, voluntary or rape of a Muslim woman, he could be considered guilty, however in Islam, the woman is always to blame for tempting the man.

More the pity the panel debating this Imam had no clue about any of the actual epistemology of Islam as a whole.

See how many you can catch. There are a lot. Would love to read your observations in the comments.

One great answer:

Back in 2014, I was so amazed by G. K. Chesterton’s book, The Flying Inn, which was a farce in the style of writing, but was prognostication in its subject matter, that I tried to make my own audiobook edition of it for free distribution so that people could realize great thinkers had predicted today’s events 100 years before. The book is about how Islam would conquer England, and the English would have to do detente with Muslim leaders.

(Eventually I abandoned the project because there were too many characters with too many accents, and I got to a point where I couldn’t keep up. (I did do around 6 chapters or more, but then it became impossibly time consuming. Thinking back on it, maybe if I had created notes for each character so I could remember how I did them it could have been finished. But when I stated the project I had no idea how many characters he had in it. Not to mention silly songs with no written tune. I had to write one for each song!)

The thing that was fascinating about. the book initially was in the opening few chapters. A woman happens across a Muslim at the sea side who is essentially preaching from a soap box about how England was initially Islamic. His evidence was how there are so many streets in London called, “Crescents” and the crescent of course, is the symbol of Islam. Ergo..

What the Heck, here is the actual chapter and link to the whole book:

[…] But between the atheist and the children’s service was a little owlish man in a red fez, weakly waving a green gamp umbrella. His face was brown and wrinkled like a walnut, his nose was of the sort we associate with Judæa, his beard was the sort of black wedge we associate rather with Persia. The young woman had never seen him before; he was a new exhibit in the now familiar museum of cranks and quacks. The young woman was one of those people in whom a real sense of humour is always at issue with a certain temperamental tendency to boredom or melancholia; and she lingered a moment, and leaned on the rail to listen.

It was fully four minutes before she could understand a word the man was saying; he spoke English with so extraordinary an accent that she supposed at first that he was talking in his own oriental tongue. All the noises of that articulation were odd; the most marked was an extreme prolongation of the short “u” into “oo”; as in “poo-oot” for “put.” Gradually the girl got used to the dialect, and began to understand the words; though some time elapsed even then before she could form any conjecture of their subject matter. Eventually it appeared to her that he had some fad about English civilisation having been founded by the Turks; or, perhaps by the Saracens after their victory in the Crusades. He also seemed to think that Englishmen would soon return to this way of thinking; and seemed to be urging the spread of teetotalism as an evidence of it. The girl was the only person listening to him.

“Loo-ook,” he said, wagging a curled brown finger, “loo-ook at your own inns” (which he pronounced as “ince”). “Your inns of which you write in your boo-ooks! Those inns were not poo-oot up in the beginning to sell ze alcoholic Christian drink. They were put up to sell ze non-alcoholic Islamic drinks. You can see this in the names of your inns. They are eastern names, Asiatic names. You have a famous public house to which your omnibuses go on the pilgrimage. It is called the Elephant and Castle. That is not an English name. It is an Asiatic name. You will say there are castles in England, and I will agree with you. There is the Windsor Castle. But where,” he cried sternly, shaking his green umbrella at the girl in an angry oratorical triumph, “where is the Windsor Elephant? I have searched all Windsor Park. No elephants.”

The girl with the dark hair smiled, and began to think that this man was better than any of the others. In accordance with the strange system of concurrent religious endowment which prevails at watering-places, she dropped a two shilling piece into the round copper tray beside him. With honourable and disinterested eagerness, the old gentleman in the red fez took no notice of this, but went on warmly, if obscurely, with his argument.

“Then you have a place of drink in this town which you call The Bool!”

“We generally call it The Bull,” said the interested young lady, with a very melodious voice.

“You have a place of drink, which you call The Bool,” he reiterated in a sort of abstract fury, “and surely you see that this is all vary ridiculous!”

“No, no!” said the girl, softly, and in deprecation.

“Why should there be a Bull?” he cried, prolonging the word in his own way. “Why should there be a Bull in connection with a festive locality? Who thinks about a Bull in gardens of delight? What need is there of a Bull when we watch the tulip-tinted maidens dance or pour the sparkling sherbert? You yourselves, my friends?” And he looked around radiantly, as if addressing an enormous mob. “You yourselves have a proverb, ‘It is not calculated to promote prosperity to have a Bull in a china shop.’ Equally, my friends, it would not be calculated to promote prosperity to have a Bull in a wine shop. All this is clear.”

He stuck his umbrella upright in the sand and struck one finger against another, like a man getting to business at last.

“It iss as clear as the sun at noon,” he said solemnly. “It iss as clear as the sun at noon that this word Bull, which is devoid of restful and pleasurable associations, is but the corruption of another word, which possesses restful and pleasurable associations. The word is not Bull; it is the Bul-Bul!” His voice rose suddenly like a trumpet and he spread abroad his hands like the fans of a tropic palm-tree.

After this great effect he was a little more subdued and leaned gravely on his umbrella. “You will find the same trace of Asiatic nomenclature in the names of all your English inns,” he went on. “Nay, you will find it, I am almost certain, in all your terms in any way connected with your revelries and your reposes. Why, my good friends, the very name of that insidious spirit by which you make strong your drinks is an Arabic word: alcohol. It is obvious, is it not, that this is the Arabic article ‘Al,’ as in Alhambra, as in Algebra; and we need not pause here to pursue its many appearances in connection with your festive institutions, as in your Alsop’s beer, your Ally Sloper, and your partly joyous institution of the Albert Memorial. Above all, in your greatest feasting day—your Christmas day—which you so erroneously suppose to be connected with your religion, what do you say then? Do you say the names of the Christian Nations? Do you say, ‘I will have a little France. I will have a little Ireland. I will have a little Scotland. I will have a little Spain?’ No—o.” And the noise of the negative seemed to waggle as does the bleating of a sheep. “You say, ‘I will have a little Turkey,’ which is your name for the Country of the Servant of the Prophet!”

And once more he stretched out his arms sublimely to the east and west and appealed to earth and heaven. The young lady, looking at the sea-green horizon with a smile, clapped her grey gloved hands softly together as if at a peroration. But the little old man with the fez was far from exhausted yet.

“In reply to this you will object—” he began.

“O no, no,” breathed the young lady in a sort of dreamy rapture. “I don’t object. I don’t object the littlest bit!”

“In reply to this you will object—” proceeded her preceptor, “that some inns are actually named after the symbols of your national superstitions. You will hasten to point out to me that the Golden Cross is situated opposite Charing Cross, and you will expatiate at length on King’s Cross, Gerrard’s Cross and the many crosses that are to be found in or near London. But you must not forget,” and here he wagged his green umbrella roguishly at the girl, as if he was going to poke her with it, “none of you, my friends, must forget what a large number of Crescents there are in London! Denmark Crescent; Mornington Crescent! St. Mark’s Crescent! St. George’s Crescent! Grosvenor Crescent! Regent’s Park Crescent! Nay, Royal Crescent! And why should we forget Pelham Crescent? Why, indeed? Everywhere, I say, homage paid to the holy symbol of the religion of the Prophet! Compare with this network and pattern of crescents, this city almost consisting of crescents, the meagre array of crosses, which remain to attest the ephemeral superstition to which you were, for one weak moment, inclined.”

The crowds on the beach were rapidly thinning as tea-time drew nearer. The west grew clearer and clearer with the evening, till the sunshine seemed to have got behind the pale green sea and be shining through, as through a wall of thin green glass. The very transparency of sky and sea might have to this girl, for whom the sea was the romance and the tragedy, the hint of a sort of radiant hopelessness. The flood made of a million emeralds was ebbing as slowly as the sun was sinking: but the river of human nonsense flowed on for ever.

“I will not for one moment maintain,” said the old gentleman, “that there are no difficulties in my case; or that all the examples are as obviously true as those that I have just demonstrated. No-o. It is obvious, let us say, that the ‘Saracen’s Head’ is a corruption of the historic truth ‘The Saracen is Ahead’—I am far from saying it is equally obvious that the ‘Green Dragon’ was originally ‘the Agreeing Dragoman’; though I hope to prove in my book that it is so. I will only say here that it is su-urely more probable that one poo-ooting himself forward to attract the wayfarer in the desert, would compare himself to a friendly and persuadable guide or courier, rather than to a voracious monster. Sometimes the true origin is very hard to trace; as in the inn that commemorates our great Moslem Warrior, Amir Ali Ben Bhoze, whom you have so quaintly abbreviated into Admiral Benbow. Sometimes it is even more difficult for the seeker after truth. There is a place of drink near to here called ‘The Old Ship’—”

I was enthralled by his epitomization of Islamic thought. One might almost say, Islamic dialectics. I had already heard a great deal of it by then.

Last week, Dr. Bostom happened across this clip from a Rhode Island Mosque. This was either from last week or the week before. Please do watch it all. It is short, and amusing, and in the context of the chapter above… well you decide what it means.