Normal Version Print Version

Should We Allow Islam to Destroy Civilization?

Dec 25, 2023


  • There are millions of moderate, good-hearted, freedom-loving Muslims around the globe who do not want to destroy civilization. But their forces are not dominant.
  • Orthodox Islam teaches hostility toward unbelievers and commands its followers to conquer all non-Islamic countries and create a global caliphate. Nations such as Iran and Saudi Arabia are actively promoting and funding violent jihad.
  • The West has been lulled asleep about the dangers of Orthodox Islam and has fallen prey to the stultifying canard of “Islamophobia” that prevents rational critiques of Islam.
  • The West (and the rest of the world) is in danger of losing its freedoms to Orthodox Islam. Will it wake up in time?

Four Intro Quotes:

Islamic Terrorists have carried out more than 44,459 deadly terror attacks since 9/11.
[ as of 12/25/23]


Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, nor comply with what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth from among those who were given the Scripture, until they pay the tax, willingly submitting, fully humbled.
[Qur’an 9:29 (The Clear Quran, Dr. Mustafa Khattab)]


It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. ’Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.
(Sahih Muslim, Book 1, Number 33)


They wish you would disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so you may all be alike. So do not take them as allies unless they emigrate in the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and do not take any of them as allies or helpers.
[Qur’an 4:89 (The Clear Quran, Dr. Mustafa Khattab)]

Let’s establish the fact that we must protect freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Of course! This article doesn’t dispute that. Instead, it focuses on the issue of “incitement to violence” which is intertwined within Orthodox Islamic teachings. Incitement to violence is not protected speech. (See legal analysis below.)

The title of this essay may seem outrageous to some, but I contend that thoughtful, freedom-loving individuals must consider this topic carefully, or indeed, a world of peace and freedom will not grow or be maintained. I’ve written this article for those who know very little about Islam and may not have given this topic any thought until now. For others, bear with me as I attempt to follow a logical path to what I believe is an inevitable conclusion.

Again, I’m not talking about banning Islam as a religion. I am speaking of its political doctrines that affect both Muslims and non-Muslims. Islam is a totalitarian political system animated by the fervor of religious belief. If Islam had no negative impact on the peace of the world, there would be no need to discuss it at all.

Beliefs Have Consequences

To discuss the issue, we must agree on certain definitions, principles, and ideals. Why? Because beliefs have consequences and affect human behaviors. Beliefs can create peace or tragic hostility and war.

The very first and most vital point of all is that every human being is a sacred creation of God with inalienable rights—even those who have different beliefs.

Individuals are not atheistic bags of meat with legs; organic machines that have no eternal value. Humans have intrinsic deep value no matter what they believe because their souls spring from a sacred source. We all think and feel and hope and dream. We’re all capable of receiving and expressing transcendent, unselfish love. We’re all capable of growth and change.

If you’re an atheist or Orthodox Muslim, you may disagree with this definition of humans. Yet is it not true that you want to live a free and fulfilling life? Or do you think that you are just organic material with no transcendent purpose? Are you just a bag of meat with legs? Shudder the thought... Our souls shout, “No!”

Do you only have value if you follow a strict set of totalitarian, religious laws? Or does your soul yearn for a direct, personal relationship with the source of love and freedom? Millions of Muslims are converting to Christianity at great personal risk.1 I believe it’s because the root of Christianity is based on sacred love and freedom.

On a practical level, we must remember that the atheistic definition of humans as “material without spirit” allowed the Marxist slaughter of over one hundred million people in the twentieth century.2

In a similar manner, the Islamic definition of humans allowed and encouraged Orthodox Muslim jihadis to slaughter non-Muslims (“kafirs” or “infidels”) at will, because Allah stated that those who reject Islam are “the worst of creatures.” [Qur’an 98.6 (Safi Kaskas)]

Beliefs have consequences.

The Divine Rights of All Individuals

Many non-religious people might say, “What’s all the fuss about ‘sacred inalienable rights’? Just be nice and treat everybody well. We don’t need to be connected to God to be good.”

“And besides, Muslims believe in God, so what are you talking about?”

Thus we arrive at one of the central requirements for true peace and freedom in the world. It must include all people equally. Beyond race, religion, and nationality: peace and freedom are meant for all. This requires that every person is treated equally, with rights that stem from a higher source. Call that source what you will, but the key component is that rights and freedoms ultimately derive from the transcendent ethics of kindness, compassion, and love—virtues that are birthed and animated by a non-material origin.

I suggest that it’s essential and logical to state that unselfish love is generated by the infinite source of all life. I call that Source God, but the name doesn’t really matter. Many might disagree, but how do they answer this question?

“Can love and kindness develop from an unfeeling void, or does it need a transcendent Source?”

There is no logical sequence of events that allows love and kindness to spring from a black void of “nothing.”

What happens when human societies ignore or abandon the divine rights of the individual? Just turn to any non-biased history book: virtually every page is awash with the blood of conquered victims. The largest numbers of victims have been generated by totalitarian ideologies. Those thought systems defined humans in a way that allowed millions of people to be slaughtered: men, women, and children.

They were slaughtered by people who sincerely believed that their victims had no value at all.

Beliefs have consequences.

Hitler’s ideology of Nazism killed around eleven million people, including six million Jews.3 It is less well-known by today’s young people that Marxism killed between one-hundred and one-hundred-fifty million people between 1914 and the year 1991 when the Soviet Union was disbanded.4 Even though it’s popular to believe that “the threat of Communism is no more,” its murders continue, most recently highlighted by the plight of the Muslim Uyghurs in China, who are killed while their organs are being harvested.5

Orwellian Propaganda

And now we arrive at a crossroad of the cleverness of evil. George Orwell’s novel 1984 described it with his example of the “Ministry of Truth,” the department where truth was changed and repackaged. Lies became the new truth.

In 2023, the world is drowning under an onslaught of Orwellian propaganda and indoctrination. Mass media and educational systems have miseducated our youth for decades, in a campaign that the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci called “the long march through the institutions.”6 It’s one thing to not know who Sherlock Holmes is (yes, I met a literate, thirty-something person who looked at me blankly when I mentioned that name), but it’s an entirely more tragic outcome to believe that Good is Evil and Evil is Good.

We see that sad phenomenon with the destruction or removal of statues and monuments that in many cases celebrated men and women who risked everything to bring goodness to the world, such as the statue of Abraham Lincoln in Boston that was taken down.7 He was a prime mover in the emancipation of American slaves during the Civil War. His statue’s removal succinctly illustrates that the real target of the rampaging mob is Western civilization, not just individuals.

The responsibility for that miseducation rests on all who participate in it, but it’s important to acknowledge the temporal source: the long arm of Marxism which has invaded Western society since the time of Marx and Lenin. Their source materials and heinous plans are available for all to see, proudly displayed on communist websites and at their bookstores.8 Unfortunately, their source materials and stated goals are ignored by the vast majority of citizens.

You might wonder why I mention Marxism in an article about Islam. I do so because Marxism is at least temporarily allied with the forces of orthodox, totalitarian Islam—what many are calling the “red-green alliance.”9 They are “strange bedfellows” because of their mutual hatred of the Judeo-Christian West. If they ever conquer the West, they will turn on each other viciously. Which side would win is an open question.

Orwellian propaganda is also produced by the followers of Orthodox Islam. One of their recent victories is the propagation of the canard of “Islamophobia,” vigorously promoted and monitored worldwide by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.10

Their campaign to combat Islamophobia (a so-called “irrational” fear of Islam) has been so successful that a large majority of Westerners sincerely believe that “Islam is a religion of peace,” and that “any criticism of Islam or Mohammed is Islamophobic, and is thus unacceptable.”

Islam Is a Religion of Violent Conquest

However, the falseness of the claim that Islam is a religion of peace is simple to prove. Go into any Muslim neighborhood in any country of the world and say critical and insulting things about Mohammed and Islam and watch what happens. You’ll be physically attacked and possibly killed, in short order.

Go into a Christian neighborhood and say critical and insulting things about Jesus or Christianity. If there’s any response at all it will most likely be, “I’ll pray for you.”

Compare the reaction of the Islamic mobs rioting and burning around the world because of cartoons of Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper11 to the minimal response from Christians regarding the profoundly insulting photo exhibit called “Piss Christ” of a crucifix with Jesus in a jar of urine, displayed in a museum in New York in 2012.12 Can you imagine how Muslims would have rioted if that same museum had a jar of urine with a drawing of Mohammed in it?

The evidence is unmistakable and can be proven at any time, anywhere: Islam is not a religion of peace. Blasphemy and apostasy are both severely punished, often with the death of the perpetrator. The website records acts of jihadist violence by Muslims on a daily basis. The mainstream media ignores almost all of the incidents. Yet if they had been committed by Jews or Christians, the global uproar would be deafening and continuous.

The media’s double standard about reporting Islamic violence was birthed in fear and an adherence to the red-green alliance. But that’s another story...

Consider what all this means as it relates to living in a world of peace and freedom. If you criticize Islam (whether you’re a Muslim or not) or leave Islam (if you’re a Muslim) then you can be put to death. They don’t have a goodbye party for apostates and give them a gold watch and thank them for their service. They don’t wish them well. They do their best to kill them.

Why? Because that’s what Mohammed did and that’s what Mohammed taught. The doctrines and historical records are clearly stated in the Qur’an, the “Hadiths” (the record of Mohammed’s words and actions), and the “Sira” (the biography of Mohammed). Most Westerners have never read any of these sources and thus accept at face value the propaganda of Orthodox Muslims who state that “Islam is a religion of peace.”

But the words of Mohammed are clear:

[In the words of] Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.’ (Sahih Bukhari 9:84:57)

After Mohammed’s death, large numbers of Muslims tried to leave Islam and were attacked and killed in the Apostasy wars. Muslim leaders realized early on that a majority of people did not want to be Muslims. The only way to grow the “religion,” which should be more honestly labeled as a “totalitarian religion of political control,” was to threaten members of the religion with death if they left or criticized Islam.

Today, if Islam’s blasphemy and apostasy laws were revoked or ignored, criticism of Islam would destroy its credibility in very short order, and millions upon millions of Muslims would leave Islam. I believe that if Muslims felt truly safe to leave Islam, the number of Muslims in the world would drop from almost two billion followers to a few million, at least over a period of a few decades.

In fact, the late Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian, orthodox, Muslim cleric who was an influential spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, inadvertently provided the best and primary indictment of Islam when he stated, on video:

If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today.

Islam would have ended since the death of the Prophet, peace be upon him. So, opposing apostasy is what kept Islam to this day. Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:33) says: “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle is that they should be murdered or crucified.” According to Ali Kulaba’s narration this verse means the apostates.13

The punishment of death for blasphemy and apostasy is entirely medieval, horrific, and, most importantly for this discussion—incitements to violence and murder by Islam and its proponents. This is how Islam treats its members and its critics.

Let us now turn our attention to jihad, defined as “A war by Muslims against unbelievers or enemies of Islam, carried out as a religious duty.”14

Faithful Muslims have the right to believe in Mohammed and everything else that goes with that belief. But they do not have the right to force their beliefs on anyone else, even though they believe that “Mohammed said so.” And that is the crux of the entire issue of “Islamic incitements to violence” and why the canard of “Islamophobia” is totalitarian nonsense.

Just because one person believes that “Allah” made Mohammed the only authority for all of humankind doesn’t mean that any other person is obligated to agree. In fact, Mohammed’s descent into the use of violent jihad, murder, and conquest as his primary methods to get people to agree with him reveals how disagreeable Islam was to the citizens of Mecca, Medina, and the rest of Arabia. Very few Arabs agreed with Mohammed until he killed so many of them that disagreement was no longer a healthy option.

Mohammed preached in Mecca for thirteen years and gained around 150 followers. He then moved to Medina, and, perhaps because of severe and resentful frustration with his lack of result in membership recruitment, changed his method of outreach from simple preaching to conversion by the sword. By his death, he had forcibly converted approximately 100,000 individuals.15

In spite of the threat of Islamic violence over the next fourteen hundred years of Islamic jihad, millions of infidels who disagreed with Islam chose death instead of conversion.16 That says a lot about the integrity of those murdered victims, but it says even more about the inherent ugliness and totalitarian doctrines of Islam. “Infidels” had a very strong reason to reject Islam, even though death awaited them. Islam’s historical and current death toll is massive, especially when the count includes all of its victims, whether in war, martyrdom or during slavery operations.

Dr. Bill Warner’s article “Tears of Jihad” documents that approximately 270 million infidels have perished under the sword of Islam, including 120 million Africans who died during the African slave trade. As Warner states: “Islam ran the wholesale slave trade in Africa.”17

These facts are not well known in the West, undoubtedly due to the distortion of history that has taken place for many decades. The reality that Mohammed and Islam were and are committed to violent jihad, global conquest, and slavery has been buried under ignorance and propaganda, both essential ingredients that fuel the accusation of Islamophobia.

It’s Time to Ban Islam’s Incitements to Violence

This article takes the position that it’s time to ban Islam’s medieval incitements to jihad, conquest, and slavery. The rationale for that position is based on two things: a) the actual history of Islamic jihad and conquest and b) the current goals of Islam as it relates to the world today.

As documented by many sources, including Robert Spencer’s superb treatise The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS18, Islam roared out of Arabia in the seventh century and within around a hundred years conquered and enslaved vast areas of formerly Christian lands. Islam occupied North Africa, including Egypt, and dominated the Mediterranean. It conquered Jerusalem and Spain (temporarily) and effectively shut down European trade across the sea. Dr. Bill Warner states that Islam was a direct cause of the so-called Dark Ages because of its impact on free trade.19

Charles Martel turned Islam back in 732 at the Battle of Tours; if he had not it’s highly likely that Europe and England would have become Islamic, which means that all the art and music of the Rennaissance would not have been created.20 America would have been founded as a totalitarian Islamic country. The Western religious, literary, cultural, economic, scientific, and political advances that created “Western Civilization” would not have happened. The entire world would be as backward—and unfree—as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan. In fact, considering the lack of original scientific advancement coming out of Islamic countries, it’s a safe bet to consider that an Islamic world in 2023 would be a pre-industrial world of poverty and want.21

Although Britain, Europe, and America avoided Islamic conquest, the Christian Byzantine Empire fell in the fifteenth century, with the streets of Constantinople running with the blood of slaughtered Christians. Now, Turkey, once entirely Christian, is run by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, an Islamic fundamentalist and totalitarian.

All of this conquest stemmed directly and irrefutably from the words and actions of Mohammed and the teachings of the Qur’an and its associated texts. These words and actions were and continue to be direct incitements to wage jihad against unbelievers until the entire world is Islamic. They are direct incitements to violence and murder and are believed and acted upon by millions of Orthodox Muslims, as was just demonstrated by the massacre of over 1,400 civilians in Israel on October 7, 2023, by Hamas. Here’s a sample of some of those “words of incitement to violence and murder.”

Your Lord revealed to the angels, “I am with you. Make the Believers stand firm; I will put terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. So strike above their necks and cut off their fingers.”
[Qur’an 8:12 (Safi Kaskas)]

Allah's Apostle said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’ ” (Sahih Bukhari 52:177)

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and spread mischief in the land is death, crucifixion, cutting off their hands and feet on opposite sides, or exile from the land. This ‘penalty’ is a disgrace for them in this world, and they will suffer a tremendous punishment in the Hereafter.
[Qur’an 5:33 (The Clear Quran, Dr. Mustafa Khattab)]

The militaristic and supremacist doctrines of Orthodox Islam are the direct cause of Muslim terrorism and jihadi violence. In a 2017 interview reprinted in Time Magazine, Yahya Cholil Staquf, the general secretary of Indonesia’s fifty-million-member Muslim organization Nahdlatul Ulama, stated:

Western politicians should stop pretending that extremism and terrorism have nothing to do with Islam. There is a clear relationship between fundamentalism, terrorism, and the basic assumptions of Islamic orthodoxy. So long as we lack consensus regarding this matter, we cannot gain victory over fundamentalist violence within Islam.22

Yahya added:

Within the classical tradition, the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims is assumed to be one of segregation and enmity.

Perhaps there were reasons for this during the Middle Ages, when the tenets of Islamic orthodoxy were established, but in today’s world such a doctrine is unreasonable. To the extent that Muslims adhere to this view of Islam, it renders them incapable of living harmoniously and peacefully within the multi-cultural, multi-religious societies of the 21st century.23

It is clear that Orthodox Islam continues to drive its adherents to “incite violence against others.” Shouldn’t those words and teachings of incitement to violence be banned? The historical and current records show that if nations and civilizations allow the violent teachings of Islam to propagate, those civilizations or nations run the extreme risk of perishing under the tyranny of Islam.

Thus, it is a question that goes far beyond the issues of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. It is a dire and immediate issue of the survival of the free countries of the world. It creates an obligation to prevent the murders and extermination of millions of people around the world who disagree with Islam and are not willing to live as second-class citizens (“dhimmis”) or convert to Islam.

Can Islamic incitements to violence be legally banned?

The National Coalition Against Censorship has a white paper called “When Can Speech Be Punished? A Primer on Unprotected Incitement to Violence.” It states:

Incitement to violence, including incitement to racial violence, is not protected by the First Amendment. This is a very narrow exception; mere advocacy of violence cannot be made criminal “except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.” Three elements must be met: (1) the speaker must intend to cause violence, (2) he or she must intend that the violence occur immediately, and (3) the violence must be likely to occur immediately.24

Islam clearly fulfills the requirement in (1) “intend to cause violence.” Two and three restrict the test to “immediately.” Islam does not match that requirement at all times.

Note that this standard of law was passed by the US Supreme Court and can thus be revised by the Supreme Court to remove the requirement that the incitement be immediate.

Education Is the Key

We must, as members of Western civilization (and any non-Islamic civilization) ask these questions:

1. Since Islam clearly teaches that it will conquer all of humanity, by force if necessary, and in so doing will remove all the sacred liberties that humanity was created to enjoy, should we allow that doctrine of conquest to grow and be acted upon?

2. Should we allow Imams to teach the doctrines of Jihad and incite their followers to commit acts of violence?

After World War II, General Douglass MacArthur’s administration of Japan included the banning of Emperor worship and the teachings of Japanese supremacy. Because they were outlawed, and replaced with educational curricula that taught the concepts of democratic freedom, a new generation of Japanese citizens grew up with a different mindset. Japan became America’s friend because the philosophies of the Japanese people evolved in the direction of freedom.25

I believe that we must do something similar with the problem of Islam.

If Muslims continue to be taught that America is the Great Satan and Western civilization must be destroyed and replaced with Mohammedism and Islamic Sharī‘ah law, and if Western citizens are not awakened to the direct peril of Islam, then the remaining countries of the West will be subsumed, just as all of the Christian countries that Islam dominated were lost to tyranny.

This is a very real threat. The Indonesian Muslim leader, Yahya Cholil Staquf, warned the West of this danger in his 2017 interview:

Over the past 50 years, Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states have spent massively to promote their ultra-conservative version of Islam worldwide. After allowing this to go unchallenged for so many decades, the West must finally exert decisive pressure upon the Saudis to cease this behavior.26

Orthodox Islam is hell-bent on destroying the West. Of course, Marxism might destroy the West first. It’s a deadly race between two totalitarian evils.

What direct steps can the West take about the dangers of Orthodox Islam, ethically and legally?

As Dr. Warner emphasizes, it doesn’t matter if someone believes in Mohammed—per se. The issues are the religious and political mandates to conquer the West that come with that belief. There are indeed Muslim reformers who abhor the medieval violence of Orthodox Islam, including the aforementioned Indonesian Muslim moderates of the Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) organization. They follow “Humanitarian Islam.” They reject a global caliphate and have published declarations that:

...emphasize the legitimacy of modern states’ constitutional and legal systems, and thus reject the idea that it is a religious obligation to establish a state based on Islamic law.

Additionally, these declarations stress the importance of equal citizenship by refusing to make a distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims as legal categories.

They call for a deeper cooperation among Muslims, Christians and followers of other religions to promote world peace.27

I honor the motivations of the Muslim reformers and hope that they’re successful. The West should support them and work with them wholeheartedly. Yet, I doubt that Islam can be reformed to become a true religion of peace because the central heart of Islam is Mohammed, and Mohammed—as evidenced by Islamic teachings—was a Very Bad Man. Reforming Islam would mean rejecting Mohammed, which would mean that it would no longer be Islam.

If we can’t criticize Mohammed, I believe that reform will be severely limited. There is some thought that the teachings about Mohammed are inaccurate and can thus be dispensed with. Unfortunately, it’s not just Mohammed. The Qur’an itself is filled with violence and hatred toward “kafirs” or unbelievers. A genuine reform of Islam would leave a very thin book.

Thus, it’s my view that the real, ultimate solution to the global threat from the violence inherent within Islam is that the majority of Muslims must reject and leave Islam, and thus reject Mohammed and his teachings.

Action Steps

To hasten that day, there are steps we can and should take.

Muslim incitements to violence, whether immediate or long-range, should be clearly illegal. Incitements to tear down Western civilization must be illegal. Actions that support those incitements (such as Islamic education and propaganda) must be illegal as well. That will mean the closing of Orthodox mosques and the deportation of Orthodox imams and other Orthodox Muslims who participate and contribute to the destruction of constitutional freedoms.

These are steps that will shock many and thus it is vital that the governments of free nations begin a substantial and long-range effort to educate their citizens about the immediate dangers of Orthodox Islam. Think “Radio Free America.”

One thing is clear. We cannot—cannot—allow the cancer of violent Sharī‘ah Islam to destroy American freedoms and free civilizations around the world.

Can we find the willpower, bravery, and wisdom to safeguard our freedoms? I am sure that we can, but will we?




1. Editorial Team, “More Muslims convert to Christianity than ever before,” July 14, 2021, Accessed December 24, 2023.


3. Editors, “The Holocaust,” October 14, 2009, Updated April 11, 2023, Accessed December 24, 2023.

Rudolph J. Rummel, “20th Century Democide,” November 3, 2002, Accessed December 24, 2023.

5. Will Martin, “China is harvesting thousands of human organs from its Uighur Muslim minority, UN human-rights body hears,” September 25, 2019, Accessed December 24, 2023.

6. Bobby Harrington, “The Long March through the Institutions of Society,” Accessed December 24, 2023.

7. Associated Press, “Statue of slave kneeling before Lincoln is removed in Boston,” December 29, 2020, Accessed December 24, 2023.

8. Communist Party USA,

9. Don Feder, “America’s pro-Hamas movement is a red-green alliance,” November 10, 2023, Accessed December 24, 2023.

10. “Islamophobia,” Accessed December 24, 2023.

11. Gil Kaufman, “Muslim Fury Over Danish Cartoons Spurs Riots Across The Globe -- Why?” February 7, 2006, Accessed December 25, 2023.

12. Amanda Holpuch, “Andres Serrano’s controversial Piss Christ goes on view in New York,” September 28, 2012, Accessed December 24, 2023.

13. Andrew Bostom, “Qaradawi: ‘If They [Muslims] Had Gotten Rid of the Apostasy Punishment Islam Wouldn’t Exist Today’ ,” January 30, 2013, Accessed December 24, 2023.

14. Webster’s New World College Dictionary. Copyright © 2014 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Accessed December 24, 2023.

15. Bill Warner, “Statistical Islam, Part 4 of 9,” November 4, 2010, Accessed December 24, 2023.

16. Bill Warner, “Tears of Jihad,” March 3, 2008, Accessed December 24, 2023.

17. Ibid.

18. Robert Spencer, The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS, (New York, Post Hill Press, 2018).

19. Bill Warner, “The Impact of Islam on Christianity,” September 26, 2017, Accessed December 24, 2023.

20. Raymond Ibrahim, “Today in History: The Battle of Tours,” October 10, 2014, Accessed December 24, 2023.

21. Bill Warner, “Debating About Islam – Part 2,” August 1, 2008, Accessed December 24, 2023.

22. Marco Stahlhut, “In Interview, Top Indonesian Muslim Scholar Says Stop Pretending That Orthodox Islam and Violence Aren’t Linked,” September 8, 2017, Accessed December 24, 2023.

23. Ibid.

24. The National Coalition Against Censorship, “When Can Speech Be Punished? A Primer on Unprotected Incitement to Violence,” Accessed December 24, 2023.

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), Accessed December 24, 2023.

25. Jason D. Hill, “On the Moral Rehabilitation of Gaza: Moral lessons from World War II,” November 17, 2023. Accessed December 24, 2023.

26. Yahya, Stahlhut interview.

27. “How the world’s biggest Islamic organization drives religious reform in Indonesia – and seeks to influence the Muslim world,” September 23, 2021, Accessed December 24, 2023.


Peter Falkenberg Brown is passionate about writing, publishing, public speaking and film. He hopes that someday he can live up to one of his favorite mottos: “Expressing God’s kind and compassionate love in all directions, every second of every day, creates an infinitely expanding sphere of heart.”

~ Deus est auctor amoris et decoris. ~

(Comments are moderated and must be approved.)
Peter Falkenberg Brown
Subscribe to our FREE E-Newsletter!
“The Epiphany of Zebediah Clump”
Watch our first film right here.