Is Wilders Wrong About Islam?

The recent criticism of Geert Wilders’ views on Islam by the leading lights of the conservative movement has created much indignation and surprise in certain quarters.

If conservative analysts with strong national security credentials couldn’t be convinced of Islam’s threat, getting the point across to the centrist politicians who define and execute policy will indeed be even tougher.

In a particularly striking criticism of Wilders, conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer asserts that “What he [Geert Wilders] says is extreme, radical, and wrong. He basically is arguing that Islam is the same as Islamism. Islamism is an ideology of a small minority which holds that the essence of Islam is jihad, conquest, forcing people into accepting a certain very narrow interpretation [of Islam]. The untruth of that is obvious.”

Without commenting on the merits of Dr. Krauthammer’s critique, it is pertinent to note that it is his opinion. This is true of Geert Wilder’s reasoned views on Islam as well. After all, both have not quoted any scientific study to back their assertions.

If Islam is a threat as some claim, what would it take to persuade that certain fundamental attributes of Islam enshrine it a violent ideology of conquest? The key to settling what Islam stands for is to let science, not opinion, dictate the debate. This is reality crystallized by an analogy:

There was a time when a male lion was seen as an embodiment of a great and dominant hunter of a pride. This perception reflected the majority of  opinions at a certain time. However, various studies conducted in ensuing  years told a different story: that female lions were the real hunters of a pride. That is, statistics of female lions hunting for their pride dominated the overall hunting pattern of a pride. These statistics put to rest the specific question of who hunted the most in a pride. In fact, these statistics form the definitive scientific basis of these studies.

More than a few Muslims have claimed that they engage in jihad (a religious war waged to advance the cause of Islam at the expense of unbelievers) because Islamic scriptures command them to do so. Even nations representing Muslim communities—Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran—have taken to sponsoring jihad worldwide, on the basis of the scriptures. There are widely varying opinions on the root cause of this—the dominant one is that the relevant Islamic scriptures have been misinterpreted. As with the discussion of the lions, a corresponding scientific query would be to find out the extent or the statistics of dislike of unbelievers and their conquest in the Islamic doctrines.

Recently, Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam has carried out a groundbreaking statistical analysis of Islamic doctrines. I summarize his studies by noting that about sixty-one percent of the contents of the Koran are found to speak ill of unbelievers or call for their violent conquest; at best only 2.6 percent of the verses of the Koran are noted to show goodwill toward humanity. Moreover, about seventy five percent of Muhammad’s biography (Sira) consists of jihad waged on unbelievers.

While there might be some subjectivity to the above analysis, the overwhelming thrust of the inferences should be noted. This overall thrust exposes the sheer absurdity of excusing the Koran-inspired terror on the so-called “selective interpretation” of the Muslim holy book or its “verses being taken out of context.”

The burden of scientific or statistical evidence suggests that Islam is an intolerant religion that drives its followers toward a violent conquest of unbelievers. If such is the thrust of the Islamic doctrines, their propagation would lead to increased violence directed at non-Muslims. Indeed, rise in Muslim extremism of the past decades is directly correlated with hundreds of billions of dollars spent by government-linked Saudi charities to “propagate” Islam worldwide.

Not surprisingly, even in the modern context, manifestations of Islamic supremacy and conquest are the norm, rather than the exception. Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden outlined a condition for terror attacks against America to cease: “I invite you to embrace Islam.” During the past sixty years most non-Muslim minorities—tens of millions—in all Muslim-majority regions of South Asia were terrorized into leaving for nearby non-Muslim-majority lands. All of this points to conquering land and people for Islam.

America’s policy approach to the Muslim world has been clouded by misrepresentations of Islam’s character. For instance, in one of the most important foreign policy initiatives of his presidency, in the now-famous Cairo speech, Obama observed that “[America and Islam] overlap, and share common principles—principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

We are left with the grim reality that at the fundamental level America’s policies toward the Muslim world are based on false premises—and hence, are untenable. This reality must be acknowledged widely before alternate policies can be devised.

We live in the era of science that has brought unprecedented security, development, health and prosperity. Yet, we have allowed opinions to dictate debate and policy on an existential threat. The importance of letting science drive policy couldn’t be clearer on the subject of Islamic radicalism.

The writer is a U.S.-based nuclear physicist and author of the book Defeating Political Islam: The New Cold War. His email is

  • Gary Rumain

    The only mistake Geert makes is his claim that there are moderate arselifters. They aren't moderate. They are bad arselifters since good arselifters follow the tenets of pislam and Mahound's example.

  • poptoy


    • David Krantz

      Yes, Geert is 100% correct, full stop.

  • WilliamB

    The study failed to note that the vast majority of the 2.6% has been abrogated by later verses. Islam is as antithetical to civilization as Nazism. Wilders understates the danger.

    • M. Muthuswamy

      You are right about 2.6% — that is why I used the words "at best."

  • Frank(ly) M'Dear

    I've spent extended periods of time in the Middle East for employment reasons, and I've heard Geert Wilders speak on two occasions. The Islam Wilders describes doesn't begin to describe the surrealism of the Middle East, but Wilders is spot on about the threat that Islam the religion poses to Western values and human knowledge and accomplishment in general.

  • Dale Dare

    I would categorically state that Geert Wilders understanding of Islam is correct and I salute him for having the courage to follow his conviction. He has many enemies, not just within the muslim communities…people see him as a qualified risk to their manifestos…His name will be secured in history as a true defender of democracy

    • M. Muthuswamy

      I am also in agreement.

      The take away point of this analysis is that we should use the language of science (through statistics) to characterize Islam – else it becomes an opinion. Had Wilders quoted a "scientific studies" in his speeches on Islam, he would have been far more successful and convincing.

      • Crossbow87

        Mr. Muthuswamy, without any irony, I'm really appreciative of the fact that you are reading and responding to comments. I've had the displeasure of debating Muslims about the content of their religion and even if Mr. Wilders had couched his argument in scientific terms, the paroxysm of pathological defensiveness would have been most violent. Are you saying he would have been more convincing to Western listeners? Even then, as Mr. Howoritz has pointed out, the common characteristic of Leftism and Islam is the ability to live in the world of make believe. Hussein Obama can no more be convinced of empirical evidence than Osama…what is your response to Muslims who deny what you claim?

        • M. Muthuswamy

          Crossbow87, thank you for your sightful comments.

          The analogy I gave of lions tells us how scientific or statistical basis was used to settle an argument. This is how we made progress on most issues to build this modern society.

          The reality is that both the Left and educated Muslims too live in this modern world. An argument couched in science can't be ignored. That's the dynamics of the world we live.

          Until now, no one has pointed to Obama or Krauthammer that their views on Islam are just their opinions and that they have no scientific basis. Also, that a statistical study of Islamic doctrines and their impact gives a different story.

          In the scenario dominated opinions, Howrovitz is right. But now, we have a new scientific insight that should act as a game changer.

          Once arguments are couched in scientific terms, Obamas to Krauthammers will find their "views" untenable.

          More details in my book.

          • William Smart

            I'd like to know how Wilders is different from other Europeans who hated the followers of Middle Eastern religions.

          • Democracy First

            How far back are you thinking? To which Europeans do you refer? In other words, to assess your comparison of Wilders to others we need to know specifically whom.

  • Crusader

    The non-muslim world seems to be in denial , for while the science of it DOES serve well , simple observation of muslims behavior around the globe ,and their treatment of non-muslim populations , their intolerance and barbarism , which has been historically consistent , makes for an unrefutable argument against islam , the religion itself ,and its adherents .
    This behavior befits what is taken as religious dogma ,unmistakeably found in the Q'uran . There has never been such a cult with such a malignant and destructive ethos towards it's fellow human beings .
    And make no mistake , this deranged cult solemnly seeks to rule the world , for it is encumbent to all "good muslims ' to struggle [jihad] to attain the "Goal of the Prophet "
    which is world subjugation to islam .

    • davarino

      Over my dead body.

      The thing that bothers me as well is that they are out breeding us, which I see as another form of jihad.

      • Gary Rumain

        Yes, its commonly termed population jihad. However, its a double edged sword. Once they run out of natural resources, arselifters are in serious trouble.

        We saw an interesting example of this not too long ago when Australia was in drought. Irrigation-based rice crops couldn't be grown in the Riverina region due to the lack of water. This caused food shortages in Bangladesh.

        So we can see that America giving away Miracle rice was a dumb idea. Giving them food aid is another dumb idea. Letting them starve is a good idea.

        • ciccio

          If you are on the "giving food" subject, here are some interesting facts that blew me out of my socks when I read them. Who are the biggest suppliers for the World food program of the UN ? Anyone guess Pakistan and Uganda ? The United States may be the biggest supplier of money, but they hardly feature when it come to buying the food. They even spent a few million dollars to buy food in "starving" Zimbabwe to buy food for, you've guessed it, the starving Zimbabweans. This is beginning to look like another massive wealth distribution scheme by your good pal, the United Nations.

          • Gary Rumain

            So the best thing to do would be to stop giving money to the UN. Zimbabwe should have collapsed a long time ago and Mugabe gotten rid of in the usual African way. Right now its limping along and it doesn't look like Morgan Tsangarai will overthrow Mugabe.

  • K. Bond

    People…I invite everyone to read the book THE LOOMING TOWER – ROAD TO 9/11 by Lawrence Wright. It will give you enough of a flavor of the Islam ideology, and then you can draw your own conclusions. Another good one is WHY THEY WANT TO KILL YOU by Walid Shoebat (an ex-terrorist converted to Western ways). Both are EYE OPENERS.

    I for one, agree 100% with Geert.

    • Gary Rumain

      Another good one is M.A. Khan's book Islamic Jihad

    • motomanic

      Wasn't Walid Shoebat turned out to be a scam and Jersusalem Post refuted his stories?


    Re: "…scientific or statistical evidence suggests that Islam is an intolerant religion that drives its followers toward a violent conquest of unbelievers."
    So why do we continue to call it "a religion", much less "a religion of peace"?

    As far as what Øbama says, I wouldn't believe him if he said it is daylight at noon.

    • Gary Rumain

      I refer to it as a satanic death cult. The Satanic Verses are all we need to prove that.

  • Historyscoper

    What is a religion? It is an artificial herd of people caused by a shared ideology. Some religions wouldn't harm a fly, while with Islam there's no limit to the cruelty and violence it will commit in order to please their idol Allah, who exists only in a book. In our modern age, Islam must go, it really must go. The ideal situation would be to break the cycle by taking the children away from the parents and bringing them up without reading a Quran or praying in a mosque, then releasing them at age 18, after which they will be free to pick any religion, or none, hint hint. Can this be done, and how? See my Winslow Plan for Defeating Islam at

  • Carole

    If anything Geert Wilders understates the dangers of Islam!
    The shocking atrocities going on around the world to Christians, Jews and in some case unbelievers of any religion, is frightening and is definitely being hushed up or in some cases reported wrongly to underestimate the threat!
    The only way to know the truth is checking out websites such as: RELEASE INTERNATIONAL; OPEN DOORS; BARNABUS FUND etc. This is will give you the true picture! The vast majority of ethnic cleansing is being caused by muslims ridding lands of all but muslims, in other words they are trying to establish a worldwide Caliphate of just muslim adherrents to Islam! One of these days, hopefully sooner rather than later the West will wake up to the nightmare we`re walking into!

  • Mo_

    How horrifying to learn that even conservatives are now opposing Geert Wilders.

    "He basically is arguing that Islam is the same as Islamism. Islamism is an ideology of a small minority which holds that the essence of Islam is jihad, conquest, forcing people into accepting a certain very narrow interpretation [of Islam]. The untruth of that is obvious.”

    What utter nonsense. Wilders is 100% correct in his views on Islam. There is not "Islam" vs. "Islamism". How did that term even come about? Muslims themselves do not identify that way.

    There is ISLAM. That's it. And ISLAM is the problem, because ISLAM is what teaches hatred and violence and oppression of women, both in the Koran and in the sayings of Muhammad.

  • muazzam

    well what you have said about islam was compltly wrong pls i want you to go back and make a good reserch about islam pls befor you say anything again pls.

    • Indioviejo

      muazzam, why do you waste our time with your infantile apologia. I'm sure that you don't even make sense in your barbaric mother dialect, so please post your silly comment in Huffpost where you will find multiculturalist that may see some value in you. I don't.

    • Crusader

      muazzam , YOU need to research your own cult of islam .I doubt if you've ever read your own Q''uran . You don't know your own prophet . Go google "Prophet of Doom " …and LEARN .

  • peanto

    Krauthammer is wrong. His ignorance is extreme. Islamism is a Western media invention. Islamism does not exist. Sack Krauthammer for deception.

  • rbla

    Here is a historical statistical study indicating that the great contribution Islam has made to civilization is a myth. Muslim conquerors parasitze on the intellectual and economic resources of conquered dhimmis. When the non Muslim population is inevitably reduced Muslim civilization declines and stagnates.

    • Gary Rumain

      Thank you for that. Its excellent and absolutely correct.

  • Henrik R Clausen
  • Henrik R Clausen

    Krauthammer? He should read a couple books. Try Prophet of Doom for starters.

  • Dale

    If one claims that Islam supports a philosophy of "darkness," it might seem an afront. But it's unfortunately scientifically proven. "Modernism" has not been a goal of Islam. Take speech and press freedoms: Gutenberg invented printing in the mid-1400s and printed the Old and New Testaments. Printing technology mushroomed throughout Europe within decades. However, the Islamic world kept printing technology blocked from use until the late 19th century, over 400 years later! By the early 20th century, Egypt was one of the few Arab countries to use printing presses, yet they were government owned or controlled, and there were only limited numbers allowed.

    Freedom of the press as a way to expand enlightment was actively blocked by the Islamic world. The opposite of "enlightenment" is a philosophy of "darkness." Wilders is correct, but he does not know the whole background.

  • Foolster41

    Muazzam: Perhaps you can enlighten us, instead of justing telling us we're wrong wrong wrong about what we see with our own eyes, hmm?

  • M. Muthuswamy

    The issue is not just what Islam stands for, but also how to mitigate the threat posed by it.

    My book gives a comprehensive look at these issues

    • Stephen_Brady

      Mr. Muthuswamy, thank you for the insightful article. I will most certainly buy and read your book, although my liberal bookseller in my home town is resisting stocking the book. If I have to, I will purchase it online.

      What … in the limited space here … is your method for mitigating Islam? Kind of a hint of what you have in your book!

  • 080

    It doesn't pay for us to argue about the Koran with Charles Krauthammer of all people or with the Mullahs. Whatever they say is o.k. with me. What concerns me is what they say and what they do. As for what they have been doing we don't have to comment. As for what they say let's take a peek at the writings of the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land (Iran) burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world." Now I know that Ayatollah George W. Bush disagrees with the Ayatollah about what the Koran preaches. I am neutral about the matter not having George's qualifications. But I don't think I would argue with the Ayatollah even if he were still around.

  • Theo

    Wilders says no more or less than T.E. Lawrence said in "Seven Pillars of Wisdom." Note Ch 3 in the Introduction (p. 20). Where Wilders sees the political influences of Islam, Lawrence saw the underlying sources, much like a Sigmund Freud of the Muslim personality. An important and relevant read.

  • M. Muthuswamy

    Thanks to all of you who have contributed to the discussion here.

    The new insight, if you will, of this article is that scientific or statistical basis should be used to define what Islam stands for. Opinions on Islam lead us nowhere — as we have seen in the past.

    People such as Obama, Krauthammer and Glen Beck must confronted and asked to back their opinions that Islam is not a threat or that it is not intolerant — on the basis of statistics. They need to be pointed to statistical analysis and data that show that Islam, indeed, is an intolerant religion and is arguably, a genocidal ideology of conquest.

    In order to do that this article is a good place to start, and my recent book (, is a good place to proceed to.

    • Harold K.

      While I haven't read your book, from your comment above I see a serious defect. It is usually not possible to prove a "negative" fact – i.e. that something does "not" exist. Can you imagine a crime defendant having to prove that he did "not" commit the crime?

      To then require "scientific or statistical" proof for the non-existence of a fact becomes close to an absolute impossibility. By requiring "statistical analysis and data that show that Islam, indeed, is an intolerant religion and is arguably, a genocidal ideology of conquest" can therefore never be accomplished and is a totally unreasonable and unrealistic demand, IMO.

      • Democracy First

        Even if one can't scientifically prove Islam is an inherently violent and intolerant faith, a simple statistical analysis can certainly lend considerable evidence to that belief.

        If, as Mr. Muthuswamy attributes to another author, the Koran and Sura are statistically overwhelmingly supportive of violence to non Muslims, then that surely supports the contention.

        And if, as Robert Spencer has written many times, many, if not the majority, of important Islamic theologians, past and present, interpret the faith thusly, we have yet more evidence.

        And if, as is the case, we see that Islamic history is an unabated imperialist march, held back only when weaker than targets for conquering, yet more proof is reveals itself.

        Huntington wrote about Islam's "bloody borders," past and present. Seems Koranic and Sura stats point out why that is.

      • M. Muthuswamy


        I think the problem is that you do not appear to understand how statistics is used.

        The way to statistically back the assertion that Islam is not a threat or Islam is not intolerant to show that at least the majority of its doctrinal content is friendly toward unbelievers. Clearly, that is not the case.

        If you manage to understand statistics, you may not have difficulty in grasping why my suggestions are logical and reasonable.

  • Linda

    What's Obama's next move, to appoint a Muslim to the supreme court? Frankly, he could not, because Muslims march to the beat of Mohammed's drum. They do not subjugate themselves to any law but Islamic law.. It is totally incompatible with western style laws, especially our Constitution. and YES Geert wilder is 100% correct!

    I beseech you to read also, the book "Eurabia" written by Bat Ye'Or. It is stunning in its revelations of the European/Arab Diologue. Be prepared to be shocked.


    Islam birth place is saud arebia but all muslim of the world in all region are converts by force or by fear. These poor souls have no idea why they are muslims and what other options they have. Given all the knowledge they will give up islam any time. To make world a better place all religons teaching should be made compulsary and leaving islam should not be punished by death. Sciencetific facts should be incorporated and when necessary old books should be these books were written not By Mohammed or Jesus but some followers base don memory. Dr Moorthy points should be considered.

  • Thor Mikalsen

    Islamic fascism must be stopt! Islam is a great danger for the hole world.Muslims belive in a pedofile massmurder they call prophet Mohammad.Go there are all the crimes in the name of prophet Mohammad well documented.And to Geert Wilders I support you 100% !

  • Harold K.

    As a statistician your viewpoint is different and there may be much that I can't yet understand from your comments. As a simple citizen who stays up on the news, it would appear that 99% of most recent (last 20 years) terrorist actions have been done by or on behalf of Islamic "doctrines," and primarily Arab Muslims. Being that Arabs make up 7% of the global population, I can't see that science or statistics is of much benefit – common sense is all we need.

    As you added that it should be statistically possible to prove that the "majority of its [Koranic] doctrinal content is friendly toward unbelievers," this seems like more of the impossible. As you know, any Bible can be, has been, and will be, interpreted in countless ways. Some so-called Islamic experts once claimed that Jihad had no negative or violent implications; real world events prove the opposite. If something as obvious as the word "Jihad" can be defined as either "peaceful" or a "holy war," I again can't see any remote possibility of "statistical proof" for Islam's "doctrinal content."

    • Democracy First

      Chances are you've read at least the Christian bible. If so you would know that clearly and objectively there is a prevailing message of peace for all mankind. There is very, very little that is violent, and nothing that authorizes Christians to forever into the future martially conquer the world for Christendom, using however much violence as need be, forcing the conquered to convert or 'feel themselves subdued."

      In contrast, that is a dominant theme of the Koran.

      One anthropologist posed the theory that Mohammed, despairing of the unrelenting warfare amongst Arabs, attempted to unite them with a faith that taught of their singular, Allah ordained mission to fight non Arabs, i.e., Muslims.

      • Harold K.

        Agree. It's been noted by many that Islam is a supercessionist religion and the Koran is essentially a put-down of Judeo-Christianity and a build-up of the the new, superior, Islam. The Koranic doctrine, "Be not friend with Christian or Jew" says it all – the rest is commentary.

  • alexander

    Geert is not only right, but he is being graciously lenient with his words. Those who doubt what he says , should do their own research. What they will find is enough to scare any civilised person. Geert is a hero and one of the greatest men in history defending a cause that could not be more important- THE SURVIVAL OF WESTERN CIVILISATION.

    • Gary Rumain

      His gracious lenience is what bothers me. Does he really know the full truth and is holding it back so as not to shock his fellow countrymen or does he not know the full extent of pislam's inherently evil doctrine?

      There's no argument that he's a hero, however.

  • Adrian Cain

    As quoted above the words of the Grand Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. "We do not worship Iran, we worship Allah. For patriotism is another name for paganism. I say let this land (Iran) burn. I say let this land go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world." This shows that Islam is inherently suicidal – as long as it's a murder-suicide, and this makes it unspeakably dangerous to the rest of the world. Iran would nuke Israel to kill the Jews even while knowing the Israeli response would turn the entire country to radioactive Glass. The reward in heaven would make it worth it. Just a bigger example of what Muslims do daily. Just like when Che and Castro told the USSR that the sacrifice of all Cubans would be worth it to strike a nuclear blow against the US, but USSR wisely turned them down. (see: Cuban Missile Crisis). And they were atheists! Nothing there to stop the religious nuts. Goddess Help Us!

  • M. Muthuswamy

    For the sake brevity, in the article, I did not take the effort to debunk Dr. Krauthammer’s attempt to distinguish Islamism from Islam.

    Krauthammer noted: “The untruth of that [the evil Islamism is not Islam] is obvious. If you look at the United States, the overwhelming majority of Muslims in the U.S. are not Islamists. So, it's simply incorrect. Now, in Europe, there is probably a slightly larger minority but, nonetheless, the overwhelming majority are not.”

    The above criterion for letting Islam off the hook is hardly credible. As a counter point let me mention that Dr. Krauthammer has been a staunch critic of communism despite the despised communist activists being the minority.

    The larger issue is Dr. Krauthammer’s inability to think deeply about what is probably the most important strategic issue at the moment. As a columnist, Charles Krauthammer is among the best, but there is no mistaking Charles as a deep thinker.

    • Democracy First

      Generally speaking, krauthammer certainly is a deep thinker. On this issue, perhaps PC has him in denial. Of course, as he says, the majority of Muslims are not Islamist. That doesn't answer the question at hand: Is the faith Islamist, Mohammed being the first Islamist and prime example. In which case, the majority of Muslims simply don't abide the faith or in denial themselves about it.

      krauthammer might say if the majority don't intepret it as Islamist, either it isn't, or it doesn't matter. If so, he'd be wrong. That's because far too many Muslim leaders are Islamist. And as long as that is a perfectly reasonable, even logical, intepretation, then Islamism will not die. Instead, it will sustain as a threat wherever there is either a Muslim-non Muslim border or sizeable Muslim minority.

      So, what's the solution? Islamic democracy is the only hope. Not that, mind you, Shariah and democracy are not, as Islamists themselves say, antithetical. But chances are the majority of Muslims would, as once did the majority of Japanese and others, adapt to and adopt democracy. As democratic peoples avoid war and conflict wherever and whenever possible – even become, ultimately, appeasers – so an Islamic revolution would naturally reform Islamic civilization and the faith itself.

      granted, the Koran and the Sura would remian unchanged. But democracy can bring a general denial as to what's there, such that Islam is nonetheless reinterpreted as something peaceful. Sure, that'll mean also denying intructions to take the faith literally as written. So be it. Stephen Schwartz and other Muslim moderates have done exactly that. They point the way.

      • M. Muthuswamy

        "Far too many Muslim leaders are Islamists"

        I have argued in my book that this is the case because even majority of the Muslims in some ways identify with extremism, although they themselves are not practitioners of one. This is what happens when the underlying ideology is extremist — as is the case with Islam.

        Whenever there is opportunity for democracy, again, it is extremists who take advantage of it through the powerful network of mosques and other Muslim religious entities.

        Pakistan had every opportunity to develop a democracy, like India. It didn't because of Islam. The medieval sharia system is an anti-thesis of democracy and naturally, undermines a community's or nation's development.

        Again, I have visited this democracy option in my book.

        So, what's the solution? Given the overwhelming focus of intolerance and extremism, reform or moderation are, from the risk management point of view, bad options. It then has got to be liberation.

        • Democracy First

          Isn't democracy liberation? Although,as you say, extremists, being unscrupulous, aggressive and violent tend to find their way to power in nascent Islamic democracies, and, it seems in Turkey, even in moderately mature ones. And yet we see evidence that the majority of Muslims will gladly adopt democracy, given a chance. hence, why Iraqis risk life and limb to vote. And they, despite voting so much along ethnic and tribal lines, accept democracy's electoral verdict and inherent compromises.

          If we could safeguard the evolving democratic process ina few key nations, it might take hold then spread.

          But first is to secure iranian regime change.

  • OTCSleepAids

    I was disappointed and concerned with Krauthammer's criticism of Wilders.

  • ribeve

    If you want to make a true mess of things and completely miss the mark, then by all means do a "scientific study" on Islam.

    Why is it that reading what the Koran says isn't good enough for these people. If you don't get it when you read it, when you see what it's people do to satisfy what the book preaches, then a "scientific study" won't clear it up for you either. People that wish to be blind will remain blind.

    We need to accept it for what it is, Wilders is right, and be proactive.

  • Alexander Gofen

    Contrary to "Krautheader" and Co, the very notions of "American" Moslems or Euarabian Moslems are oxymoron. "Good" Moslems do not belong to a Christian nation, nor to a secular nation. What business may have authentic Moslems in a Christian nation but to undermine the Judeo-Christian foundations of this nation?!

    "So long as there is this accursed book [Koran], there will be no peace in the world."
    William Ewart Gladstone (1809-1898)

    See also a brilliant Churchill's quote

    and the bigger picture why Islam became the main threat to the civilization.

  • henry

    No one of you are going to get far in your efforts to sound the alarm in time to save our country from the Koran Worshipers unless you will stop being so polictically correct as to never be able to bring yourselves to calling out the most basic and real truth about the fact that the Koran encourages and supports cold-blooded murder! It plainly and clearly calls for the murder of many slight actions – such as quiting the Religion of Allah. The reward for cold- blooded murder can be unlimited extra-marital sex with blood in heaven 70 times a day. It is a Religion of Murder and Revenge and worship of the God of murder – but if no one will say so, what good does it do to say you are against them? If they are not guilty or murder worship and support, who cares?

  • Fullofflies

    All true muhammadian muslim
    go by the book of Koran and
    In Islam either you follow or
    you die….that reasoning…..

    Jihad is the way for all true muhammadian muslim
    for Islam….

    If all eighty percent dutchmen were to become
    muslim in holland Wilders will be the next one
    on the chopping block…

  • henry

    Wilders is totally correct as far as he goes – but he does not go far enough to save civilization from the Koran Savages! You can meet a thousand wonderful, kind, generous, peace loving Muslims here and there all most any place on the globe – but look here! They are all required from birth to believe every word of the Koran is the absolute and unchanging and unchangeable truth of God and it clearly tells them that it is often alright to commit cold-blooded murder and they will be rewarded in heaven by almost unlimited extra-marital sex with blood every time? The Koran does say that doesn't it? So, given the thousand, how in the world could you meet many of 'em without sooner or later meeting one who believes in the whole Koran? How do you figure that is unlikely? I just want to know how you'd figure any other kind of relationship with a Muslim is likely? Would you not always be wondering? What exactly is the ratio of Believer to unbeliever? I mean, wouldn't one think about the chances first? In the meantime – consider all Muslims as potential murderers – isn't that the only save thing to do, except for joining the Muslim Church in order to keep your head, and the heads of your families on their necks – Well! Isn't what I said the truth? If so, why don't more of you tell it!

  • a.tayyab

    Good article and good comments exposing islam's evil character.I cannot explain misrepresentation of islam by non-muslims but I can explain misrepresentation of islam by muslims because misrepresentation or deception is the basic character of islam and it's allah which proclaims that it is the master of deceit or the best in deceit(quran3:54).Majority of muslims do not know islam and lie about islam unknowingly by saying that G.Wilders is using verses of quran out of context when in fact that is the very essence of islam.Perhaps the deception of muslims that islam is one of the so called Abrahamic religions is clouding the minds of non-muslim supporters of islam;when in fact there is no such thing as Abrahamic religions.It is like budhism- hinduism- sikhism trying to go a little farther back and claim that they are linked with islam as one of the Noahamic religions; I am certain no muslim will fall for that because they will know the deception.The fact is that Moses and Jesus have nothing to do with islam,it's allah,mohammad and muslims because they all deny and condemn the belief in the Father and the Son and according to 1John2:22 are the Liars and the Antichrist.

  • 9-11 Infidel

    I don’t need science to understand Islam. All one has to do is read the Koran, Hadiths and the Sira. Throw in the Reliance of the Traveler, a careful study of Islamic jurisprudence in the various Sunni and Shia schools of jurisprudence and understanding Naksh, what the word Islam actually means, 1400 years of Islamic history, was more than enough to convince me that the followers of the god who hates are Nazis. That’s not an opinion it is a fact. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam…just Islam…period. As Ali Sina said “I [feel] no need to look elsewhere in order to find the truth, as I was convinced that I have already found it. As Muslims say “Talabe ilm ba’d az wossule ma’loom mazmoom”. The search of knowledge after gaining it is unnecessary.”

    • M. Muthuswamy

      9-11 Infidel:

      The scientific "approach" to addressing a contentiously viewed phenomenon is the modern and widely accepted way of properly addressing it.

      If we want policies to reflect the reality of what Islam stands for, it is in our interest to force the discussion of Islam's underpinnings in this direction.

      • 9-11 Infidel

        I choose Sun Tsu's approach, which is to know my enemy. I don't need science to prove anything. All I need is a copy of the Koran. Sura 9:5, or Sura 9;29 says what it says. No interpretation is necessary. The best way to fight Islam and Western ignorance about it is to study the subject. Many of us in here already understand It doesn't take a "modern" anything to understand an ancient problem. It only takes a "working brain" and the desire to acquire knowledge. You stick to your science, I'll stick to my Islamic studies.

        • trickyblain

          Unless you're reading Arabic, interpretation is all you have to go on…

  • Patricius

    Americans should know that to Obama it's the "Holy" Koran. People who hold the Bible as holy he calls "bitter clingers".

  • henry

    No one knows much about Islam – Even us here – I see the same names on every good site over and over again – and even these almost never, if ever, will dare to call Muslims who believe every word of the Koran, "potential murderers", and their God, Allah, as the God of Murder and their Jesus Christ, Moe, as the prophet of murder, and their Bible, the Koran, as the Bible of Murderers. We Christian have seven sacraments (you know what they are) so too do the Muslims have seven sacraments of murder – 1, Murder, or defacto enslavement for non-Muslims 2, murder of Muslims who tries wholeheartedly to quit the Muslim religion 3, Murder of wives who refuse to obey husbands even after hard beatings 4, Murder of own children if they are willfully disobedient to the point of embarrassing the family. 5, Murder of prisoners of war if they will not cooperate in their soft rape by Muslim soldiers. 6, Murder of anyone who says bad things about the Koran and what is written in it. 7, Murder of anyone who physically harms any copy of the book they have named" The Koran". Tell me why you are all so reluctant to use the "M" word? Isn't it fear of you and your family being murdered? Of course it is, unless you really don't believe they are all potential murderers who believe totally. But, how could that be possible? Time to speak the truth before it is too late! Who will be first? Certainly not our present leaders!

  • IQ al Rassooli

    This is an excellent, though perhaps overly cautious article, ending with completely correct conclusions.

    It's very sad – but not remotely surprising – that the world's media and press try so very hard to marginalise and discredit anyone who wishes to question or criticise Islam. For this reason very few people in the world have even heard of Geert Wilders and many of those who have hold distorted and negative views about him only because of the selective and unfair way in which he has been portrayed and presented (when at all).

    Without a doubt the main trusts of "standard" or "mainstream" Islam are violent, intolerant of absolutely everybody who has not obsessively "submitted" to the cult of Muhammad and of course highly predatory for everybody else's land, women and material wealth.


    • IQ al Rassooli


      Obviously it's a terrible shame that Geert's trial is neither going to be fair nor actually continue (at least not quickly or entirely in public) – it would be wonderful for the world to witness the spectacle of Islam and it's hateful, bigoted and insightful Qur'an properly scrutinised in public by a wide variety of true experts.

      It would also be very helpful for people currently unaware of the horrors at the core of Islam to hear a few in-depth cross examinations of some of the many murderers (such as Mohammed Bouyeri) currently behind bars. These people typically adopt the Islamic "honour killing" style of slaughtering their poor victims (in Bouyeri’s case it was Theo van Gogh). They kill with astonishing frenzy and are often completely openly about it and without shame.


      • IQ al Rassooli

        (by the way, please forgive my bad English – it's not my 1st language – when I called the Qur'an "insighful" I meant "inciteful"…. because of course it incites people to commit violent acts, I most certainly did not mean that it contains any clear or useful information!)

        • Stephen_Brady

          I appreciate what you have said, and your English is expressed very well. I didn't take the "insightful" comment wrong. It was used in a proper context, and I understood it.

          • IQ al Rassooli

            Thanks for your kind words, Stephen, I very much appreciate your feedback.

            I clicked your link and read a few of your other recent comments – all of which I am in full agreement with. I noticed for example your comment in support of Israel – a country totally (and very successfully) demonised by an intense propaganda of lies and distortions initiated mainly by Arab Muslims then championed, enlarged and propagated throughout the world by the typically (and tragically) “politically correct” (by factually and morally totally incorrect) Left.


  • IQ al Rassooli


    They never show the slightest signs of second thoughts, remorse or pity simply because their "religion" has trained them to obsessively fantasise about such killings and believe that this is what they must do (and if at all possible with themselves “gloriously” dying in the process to be assured their “rewards” of mindless virgins etc in their seedy brothel-in-the-sky).

    I’ve been studying the Qur'an in its original Arabic (my mother tongue) for around 3 decades now, and for the last few years I've been freely sharing my findings, and warning anyone who'll listen, about this vile and literally mind-bending cult of Muhammad, slavery and death. If any one is interested please do feel free to listen through a few of my short but detailed and factual talks (currently more than 260) on my YouTube channel; (and of course please do comment on them and join in with the debates).

    Kind Regards,
    IQ al Rassooli

  • Salubrius

    Wilders is right. Fortunately, some 85% to 90% of Muslims don't follow the real Islam as it is written in the Koran and was practiced in the 7th Century, but follow a mellowed version. The Islamists call themselves salafis, practitioners of Islam as it was practiced in the 7th Century. They blame the decay of the Muslim civilization, in comparison to the West, on Muslims not practicing true Islam. However Wilders agrees, just because Islam is bad doesn't mean all Muslims are bad. Most have discarded the policies and practices objected to by Wilders.

    Krauthammer is dead wrong.

    • IQ al Rassooli

      I wish you were right, Salubrius, but sadly you could not be more disastrously mistaken. such wishful thinking (or possible "taquia" if you are another follower of Muhammad trying to fool or weaken the resolve of us Kuffar?) is extremely delusional and dangerous.

      Having been born in Iraq and speaking Arabic I have seen Islam from "the inside" and know exactly what it is about and how it works….. vast numbers of Muslims appear harmless and pleasant enough but in reality a very large number (though admittedly not all) of they are discreetly and tacitly supporting terror (normal everyday Jihad in the name of Allah), perhaps for example by making "charitable donations" to fund random murder, or if they have the chance by using their positions of influence and trust in the west to distort policies and weaken security, or maybe by just waiting for their own turn to commit some astonishing vile act themselves "Insha'Allah" (which means, roughly speaking, with Allah's help to carry it out).


  • henry

    Salubrius is dead wrong – accurate Muslim theology belongs to those who follow exactly what all of the Koran and all of the commentaries surrounding said book have agreed on for hundreds of years – those uninformed Muslims are easily corrected by anyone who has been shown the only way of reasonably interpreting the Koran and related ancient writings. Those 85 to 90% (10 to 15 % willing to be suicide bombers – that makes you feel safe?) are not 85 to 90 % but even if they were, all it takes is someone to teach them Reading Comprehension and then you have millions and millions more doing what the Koran clearly requests and commands – namely, the conversion, virtual slavery, or death of all humans. You Salubrius, are a very easy target for dhimmyhood

    • IQ al Rassooli

      Exactly! Agreed!

      Entire populations living in dreadful poverty and appalling conditions (mainly due, by the way, to the "teachings" of Muhammad concentrating their minds on hatred and preventing them from any form of human progress) are trained (ok, "brainwashed") into believing that they should never expect any comfort or enjoyment during their actual lives but will somehow get "extraordinary" rewards (which entail sex, booze, food and – would you believe – running water) in return for murdering "Kuffar" (anyone not submitting to their cult and so believed by them to be "guilty" and worthy of death).


  • M. Muthuswamy


    Apparently, the URL link in the following statement is not working.

    During the past sixty years most non-Muslim minorities—tens of millions—in all Muslim-majority regions of South Asia were terrorized into leaving for nearby non-Muslim-majority lands.

    Here is one that is working:

  • Mike

    The only thing that Wilders did wrong is to call for the banning of the Quran. The important about freedom of speech and freedom of press is the freedom to do so no matter how idiotic and stupid it may seem or how stupid it really is.

  • netwit

    Funny how Krauthammer during the "Passion of Christ" controversy six years ago was all over the Gospel texts as damning evidence for Christian intolerance. Maybe if Mel Gibson made a new movie, say, "The Passion of Mahomet (for Little Girls)," Charles would sit up and listen.

    • Democracy First

      Do you have a link to his columns on that?

  • henry

    Mike! You said, "The only thing that Wilders did wrong is to call for the banning of the Quran." Not so Mike! Consider: The Koran is such a powerful incitement to riot and murder and violence that any civilized society would, at times, need to suppress it as an essential need for public safety. It calls for cold blooded murder of anybody who might harm the delicate paper book in even slight ways – it calls for the cold-blooded murder of anybody who seems to be a Muslim and tries to worship another way – it calls for the virtual enslavement of innocent people who are not Muslims! This Book is a book of murder and it does nothing if it does not incite the Muslim public to murder innocent people – it is even pornographic, suggesting sexual marriage between a tiny child, and fully mature men! YOU would have a book advocating cold blooded murder and child pornography that clearly incites to riot and insurrection to ALWAYS be on sale no matter what the conditions of the public safety? No, of course not, take it back.

    • IQ al Rassooli

      Actually no; rather than being banned I think the Qur’an should be EXPOSED for the vile and insightful fraud it is! It should be TAUGH throughout all schools in the “west” (especially to children of Islamic families living – often parasitically – in those countries) and certainly not with any silly reverence (as though it really is some important “divine” work) but in full unabridged scrutiny of its truly anachronistic hate and greed.

      I would hope that once all of the people currently unaware of what it really contains are properly revolted and disgusted by it once they become better informed.

      Kind Regards,
      IQ al Rassooli

      • IQ al Rassooli

        PS. sorry – I keep typing "inciting" wrongly, I certainly do NOT mean "insightful" – I'm still trying to improve my English!

  • Sue

    Islam is taking over the world by stealth, they are not in any rush, it may take them 20 years, 200 years, but they must succeed – it’s what they are told to do. Watch Wafa Sultan on You Tube, she’s an ex muslim living under a fatwa and hopefully she will be a witness at Geert Wilders trial. Meanwhile there is a petition if anyone would like to sign it:

  • IQ al Rassooli


    By the way, very few people these days know but prior to 1948 the only “Palestinians” in the world were Jews living in the British Mandate waiting to be given their country back, following promising going back several decades (and absolutely nothing to do with a “disproportionate knee-jerk reaction” to the Holocaust). The “Palestinians” of today are a complete fraud, thrown together during the 1960s and 1970s from a wide range of disparate and itinerant people cynically used and manipulated by their “fellow” Arabs for purely political reasons.

    When I have time and see appropriate opportunities I’d like to post in more detail on this topic. Meanwhile I’d be absolutely delighted to “meet” you in any of the discussion threads on my YouTube channel, AhmadsQuran3.

    Kindest Regards,

  • IQ al Rassooli


    It's perfectly true that some countries, such as for example Turkey, do for a while drift away from "hard line" (i.e. just same-old mainstream) Islam. This helps them in many ways (any move away from Islam no matter how slight can only be good news), however a resurgence of full-on "traditional" Islam ALWAYS follows sooner or later plunging the whole population back into misery and the dark ages (or worse).

    Wilders is correct. Krauthammer is correct (and scientific and impartial in arriving at his findings).

    Sorry, but it is you who that is "dead wrong"….

    IQ al Rassooli

  • cochavi1

    Wilders being right about Islam. I will look forward to reading the author's new book.

  • IQ al Rassooli


    Given their poverty, misery and total lack of education (and genuine fear of questioning anything they have been told let alone "rebelling" against it and refusing to kill or die for this ancient nonsense) it is not remotely surprising that we have endemic violence and stupidity on a massive scale from these people.

    It's easy to forget if you are living in the USA because even though your news media is constantly full of the endless horrors raging every moment of every day all around the world as a direct result of this "religion of peace" it is still (at least for now) mostly happening a long way away and easily ignored or rationalised away into another explanation.

    IQ al Rassooli

  • James Just

    Geert Wilders is absolutely correct about Islam being an existential threat to non Christians. Saint Augustine was born in Algeria,so where are the Algerian Christians left now in the world? Muslims kill Christians, look at Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Mindanao, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand. Jihad is central to the Koranic doctrine.

  • henry

    James Just is absolutely correct – Islam is out to murder all of us who will not become slaves of Allah, or use us for cheap labor. What the mystery is is why so few of us know it? Any ideas out there? The truth seems extremely clear – why do just us know it? Why!

  • NikTorn

    I think the core of the problem is belief as a psychological phenomenom. As a complete non-believer in religion myself it just comes across as completely ludicrous to think that simply believing some idea would make any difference in how a hypotethical just and good god would judge anyone. Believing something, or saying you do, does not change who you are at a core level. I think it can be considered a scientific fact that people can (be made to) believe anything, based on the vast amount of different religions, superstitions, myths and rituals that humans have always indulged in. People need to step out of their own personal perspective and see that not everything is spinning around their own persona, as religious people often hope is the case. Not all religious ideologies are as destructive as islam though of course…

    Persuing a scientific approach to the problem, as the article suggests, should be good. The facts are there in the islamic texts, ready for comparing with reality for anybody with an ounce of critical thinking. We in the west has to investigate what is a reasonable interpretation of the islamic doctrine, based on what one can expect a person to behave like when presented with such a doctrine as the word of god and not fall for the constant misleadning by religious fantaics. It is just a matter of getting the knowledge to the mainstream so that public opinion starts overriding political correctness.

    • henry

      No Nik Torn, it is NOT just a matter of getting the knowledge to the mainstream! That is what all the people who are not extinct from Muslim take overs down through a thousand years of History thought. Pull yourself back from the sure death such wishful thinking always brings to those who ignore what the Koran always clearly states. Death to the Unbelievers!

      • NikTorn

        I agree in a way, it is not ALL that is neeeded, but somehow everybody needs to first unite and realize there is a problem. We can still change some things in politics, like not making the matter worse by letting in thousands of immigrants from muslim countries every year. In a way much damage has already been done though (in Europe) so perhaps some kind of conflict will be unavoidable.

  • henry

    nik torn – I am just suggesting that nothing – exactly nothing, less than pushing the panic button NOW will suffice to save our life. Let Loose the Dogs of War!

  • Dragan

    The brave Swiss vote finally turned the tide the other way against a growing ideology, not based on mutual respect or tolerance, but one bent on domination and backward ideals that run counter to democracy and the rule of law. The tide has turned, and since, Belgium and France have begun real actions, though with the coming of Geert Wilders this summer – Europe will change. He will cause the new movement and way of thinking that will seep into every corner of Europe, as it will be hard to ignore any longer. The green arrow will be redirected back to its rightful nest.

  • wldbil

    I pretty much agree with Geert Wilders…
    but that is not important..
    What is important is freedom of speech. Humanity is in deep trouble if this hate speech Trojan Horse to silence free speech is not stopped dead in it's tracks….

  • henry

    Dear Wldbil – I don't know if total "free speech" should always be allowed. Speech that is likely to cause sedition or mass murders should be curtailed until such time as the public and the children be safe. The most dangerous book in the world – the one that sanctions out and out cold blooded murder and flagrant deadly racism is called the "Koran" – it should be banned always when there is a national emergency or it will end by causing unnecessary murders – think I'm right?

  • henry

    Doesn't the Koran call for seditions in order to replace whatever government happens to be standing in any country if it is not Muslim? Well, if a whole bunch of people are apt to be moved by said book to violent rebellion, should such a book be allowed to be passed out on the streets?

  • Paula

    Of course, GW is correct in everything he says about Islam, but he doesn't go far enough. He would tolerate law-abiding, moderate Muslims but Moderates can turn violent on short notice.
    People should realize that all the violence in Islam is not committed by so-called jihadists in organizations like Al Qaeda and Hamas. "Every-day" (as someone referred to them) Muslims do most of the killing.
    Go to Voice of the Martyrs at and Compass Direct to learn about how Muslim neighbors of non-Muslims often turn into murderers. Look at Nigeria, in the news right now for that reason. Look at the hundreds killed and raped in Kenya in 2006 by Raila Odinga's followers. He is Obama's Muslim tribal cousin who Obama helped in Odinga's presidential campaign. Just two examples that come to mind out of hundreds. A "moderate" muslim can turn violent on short notice. I'm amazed at Krauthammer's statement. I took him to be a very intelligent well-informed person. Well, he's obviously not been doing his homework about Islam. Islam, when properly practiced according to the Koran, is a death cult.

  • henry

    Dear Paula, words of intelligence from you – good to see these days. Sometimes, in rare and dangerous occations, free speech must be silenced. When you have a book circulated by people known to love out and out murder of totally innocent people, and that book, the Koran, strongly advocates and promises to reward said murders, it is time to make sure such an an ObamaNation is taken out of circulation before it ends by murdering more innocent people.

  • interior design jobs houston

    If some one wishes to be updated with latest technologies therefore he
    must be pay a visit this site and be up to date every day.


    Hi there! I know this is kinda off topic but I’d figured I’d ask.
    Would you be interested in trading links or maybe
    guest writing a blog post or vice-versa? My blog goes over
    a lot of the same topics as yours and I feel we could greatly benefit from each other.
    If you might be interested feel free to send me an email.
    I look forward to hearing from you! Awesome blog by the way!