Watch Videos


Monday, April 23, 2012

Did Muhammad Exist?

One of the jihadists’ most potent psychological weapons is the double standard Muslims have imposed on the West. Temples and churches are destroyed and vandalized, Christians murdered and driven from the lands of Christianity’s birth, anti-Semitic lunacy propagated by high-ranking Muslim clerics, and Christian territory like northern Cyprus ethnically cleansed and occupied by Muslims. Yet the West ignores these depredations all the while it agonizes over trivial “insults” to Islam and Mohammed, and decries the thought-crime of “Islamophobia” whenever even factual statements are made about Islamic history and theology. This groveling behavior confirms the traditional Islamic chauvinism that sees Muslims as the “best of nations” destined by Allah to rule the world through violent jihad.

Even in the rarefied world of academic scholarship, this fear of offense has protected Islam from the sort of critical scrutiny every other world religion has undergone for centuries. Some modern scholars who do exercise their intellectual freedom and investigate these issues, like Christoph Luxenberg or Ibn Warraq, must work incognito to avoid the wrath of the adherents of the “Religion of Peace.” Now Robert Spencer, the fearless director of Jihad Watch and author of several books telling the truths about Islam obscured by a frightened academy and media, in his new book Did

Muhammad Exist? challenges this conspiracy of fear and silence by surveying the scholarship and historical evidence for the life and deeds of Islam’s founder. 


Could Islamist rebels undermine change in Africa?

Creeping from the periphery in Africa’s east and west, Islamist militant groups now pose serious security challenges to key countries and potentially even a threat to the continent’s new success.

The biggest story in Africa south of the Sahara over the past few years hasn’t been plague, famine or war but the emergence of the world’s poorest continent as one of its fastest growing – thanks to factors that include fresh investment, economic reform, the spread of new technology, higher prices for commodity exports and generally greater political stability.

Ethiopia lives under constant attack and threat of Islamist’s throughout history, what is new now is the threat is reaching other African countries and they are feeling it. It is the right time now Africa to stand united against this threat“

Islamists kill 7 civilians in north Nigeria

Gunmen from radical Islamist sect Boko Haram have killed at least seven civilians in the past 24 hours in a spate of attacks in northern Nigeria, police said on Thursday.

Boko Haram, which wants to carve an Islamic state out of Africa's most populous nation split evenly between Muslims and Christians, has killed hundreds in almost daily gun and bomb attacks this year.

Muslims torch Khartoum church

Muslim mob has set ablaze a Catholic church frequented by Southern Sudanese in the capital Khartoum.

The church in Khartoum’s Al-Jiraif district was built on a disputed plot of land but the Saturday night incident was almost certainly part of the fallout from ongoing hostilities between Sudan and South Sudan over control of an oil town on their ill-defined border.

Last week, South Sudanese troops seized Heglig, which the southerners call Panthou, sending Sudanese troops fleeing. The Khartoum government later claimed to have regained the town.

The witnesses and several newspapers said a mob of several hundred shouting insults at southerners torched the church.

The mostly Christian and animist South Sudan seceded from Sudan in 2011, some six years after a peace deal ended more than two decades of war between the two sides.

But tens of thousands of southerners remain in Sudan, a legacy of the civil war that drove hundreds of thousands of them to seek relative safety in the north of what was then a single Sudanese nation. 


Sudanese warplanes strike at South Sudan border towns

Sudanese war planes crossed a disputed border region to conduct airstrikes in South Sudan on Monday, a witness said, escalating fighting that threatens to return the neighboring African countries to full-scale war.

The report of the bombing of the towns of Bentiu and Rubkona comes days after South Sudan pulled its troops at the request of the United Nations from the disputed, oil-rich region of Heglig, though Sudan claims its soldiers retook the area from South Sudanese soldiers.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

ANALYSIS: Muslim Brotherhood positions on terrorism- denial, deception, defense, and obstruction

A review of almost twenty years of statements and documents produced by a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood organization makes it possible to understand the public approach of the Brotherhood toward terrorism. The analysis reveals that it is almost always possible to parse Brotherhood positions on terrorism into one of four conceptual categories, each of which follows in a logical progression:

1. DENIAL- Since the Brotherhood is pursuing Islamization and eventually Shariah (Islamic Law), it is necessary at all costs to deny that Islam as a religion has any connection to violence or terrorism. Of course, the Brotherhood represents Islamism as opposed to Islam in this regard but since the general audience does not understand that distinction, it is Islam which is the Brotherhood reference. They cannot afford to fail in this denial and the denial strategy is usually pursued through sophistry. That is, the Brotherhood claims that Islam is unfairly associated with terrorism while Christianity, Judaism, and other religions are not (e.g. Abortion bombers are not called Christian Terrorists) and/or that other religious terrorism is just as dangerous as Islamic terrorism. The Brotherhood may be winning this battle (see here.) 

2. DECEPTION- In order to defend Islam (Islamism) from charges that it is inherently violent/terroristic, the Brotherhood deceives the public about the nature of Jihad. This is necessary because Jihad plays an important role for Islamism and the Brotherhood and if the connection between Islam and violence is to be denied, Jihad must be explained away. Again, the Brotherhood represents the “Jihadism” of the Islamists as opposed to the “classical Jihad” of Islam but since that distinction is also lost on the public, the Brotherhood defends Jihad. It does so usually in one of two ways, sometimes employing both deceptions. First, the Brotherhood claims that Jihad has little or no connection to violence and warfare (i.e. there is no “Holy War”), and is instead akin to various forms of inner struggle or self-improvement. Second, the Brotherhood suggests that Jihad is a form of “freedom fighting”, even comparing Jihad to the American Revolution. Lately, there has been a suggestion that Jihad should be replaced with the term “Hirabah” which, if successful, would represent a victory for the Brotherhood deception strategy 

3. DEFENSE- Having staked out the positions that Islam is not violent and that Jihad is not connected with violence, the Brotherhood is left with the task of defending the violence carried out by Islamist groups. Since according to the Brotherhood these groups cannot, by definition, be motivated by Islamic ideology, there can be only one answer- they are fighting because of “legitimate grievances” and hence are “freedom fighters.” This defense of Islamist violence is mounted differently for Brotherhood-related groups such as Hamas as opposed to Al Qaeda. Because of the visible dispute over land, it is easy for the Brotherhood to suggest that the actions of Palestinian terror groups such as Hamas are based on such grievances whereas, in reality, the Brotherhood has managed to turn the conflict into a religious war. The most viable strategy for the Brotherhood in the West is to posit that the problem is “Occupation“, leaving it to the audience to figure out whether the reference is to 1967 or 1947. Given the sensitivity in the West towards terrorism at home, the Brotherhood has a far more difficult job explaining Al Qaeda terrorism which is does by suggesting that while nothing “justifies” such terrorism, Al Qaeda actions spring from justified anger at U.S. foreign policy. This strategy provides a natural interface” for the Brotherhood with the political far-left and, in Europe, the Brotherhood has been successful in forging such alliances. 

4. OBSTRUCTION- Having explained the violence of Islamist groups as a response to legitimate grievances, the Brotherhood is free to obstruct counter-terror efforts. One portion of its efforts is devoted to protecting its charities (e.g. Holy Land) and associated infrastructure which help to support Hamas and other Palestinian terrorism. The second part of the effort lies in hindering wider U.S counter-terror policies which it does by providing inaccurate analysis, positing plots and conspiracies about a “war on Islam” and opposing almost every counter-terror initiative undertaken by the government, suggesting instead that the correct response to terrorism is to change U.S. foreign policy, the ultimate goal of the obstruction. Again, the natural ally is the far-left and the Brotherhood has been successful in the U.S and forming such alliances with respect to counterterrorism policy.

Taken as a whole, the Muslim Brotherhood public relations strategy regarding terrorism should be seen for what it is, a remarkably consistent and internally coherent means of obscuring the true aims and goals of the group. That the Brotherhood is inherently deceptive should be clear since almost without exception, no Brotherhood organization has admitted to being as such. 

Egyptian Cleric: It’s an ‘obligation to cheat at elections’

Over and over, evidence emerges from Islamic nations that democracy and voting are instrumental means to an intrinsic end: the establishment of a decidedly undemocratic but draconian form of law—Islamic law, or Sharia.

Earlier, for instance, there was Dr. Talat Zahran, an Egyptian cleric who proclaimed that it is “obligatory to cheat at elections—a beautiful thing.” His logic was simple: voting is a tool, an instrument, the only value of which is to empower Sharia.

Now an Egyptian cleric has thoroughly Islamized the concept of voting.

Context: the presidential campaign of Abu Ismail—the Salafi candidate who openly declared that there is no freedom in Islam, the candidate most likely to try to implement the totality of Sharia if elected—has been compromised due to recent allegations that his mother was an American citizen.   In response, Hazim Shuman, a cleric that appears on satellite, just issued a fatwa saying, “Voting for Abu Ismail is jihad in the path of Allah [jihad fi sabil Allah], and paradise awaits whoever is martyred during Abu Ismail’s political campaign.” 


It's Christian blood for oil in newest Sudan violence

The oil-rich border region between Sudan and the new Republic of South Sudan is becoming a battle zone, with reports of burning tanks and plumes of smoke dotting the landscape.

High numbers of fatalities also have been reported, and the catalyst for the bloodshed has been identified as oil money.

Press and intelligence reports from the region say that South Sudan claims the Khartoum regime tried to build an illegal oil pipeline across Sudan’s border into South Sudan’s oil fields. 

There have been reports that money and weapons also are pouring into both Sudan and the recently independent south, which have been in conflict for decades because of the Muslim government’s war on the mostly Christian and animist population in the south..

International human rights groups believe Sudan is trying to incite a renewed conflict. International Christian Concern’s Africa analyst Jonathan Racho said that Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir wants to fan the flames of war.

The government of Sudan wants to stoke violence in the border regions with the south Sudan. Their ultimate goal is to retake oil producing regions from the hands of south Sudanese,” Racho said.

A former CIA station chief who has asked not to be named confirmed that al-Bashir’s interest in the south is connected to the south’s natural resources.

Basically, Bashir could care less about the South Sudan and its people, except for the oil in the border regions,” the former CIA officer said.

The former station chief said that Bashir’s may be trying to recapture the oil fields.

This is what he’s planning to retake I think. Without that oil South Sudan is really just another dirt-poor, poverty-stricken African hell-hole. Frankly I was surprised when [Bashir] accepted independence for the region, so that indicates he had some sort of plan then,” the former station chief said.

The station chief said Bashir has some major supporters.

He has the full support of both the Chinese communists and the Muslim states,” the former CIA officer said.

The former CIA officer said that South Sudan’s supply line isn’t as reliable.

South Sudan has the dubious ‘support’ of the U.S. and a little more help from Israel. But they really need a couple of billion to build their own pipeline to get their oil out of the country across Ethiopia or Kenya,” the former station chief said.

A second military analyst who has asked not to be named confirmed that Bashir’s regime is after the oil revenue and found a way to get it.

Sudan was stealing about half of south Sudan’s oil exports for transit ‘fees’ to the port as it went through,” the military analyst said.

South Sudan halted oil exports until a pipeline through Kenya is completed next year. This move leaves Sudan perilously short of money,” the analyst said.

The government of Sudan has not responded to WND’s request for an interview.

WND reported last week that while Bashir may be after the oil, the Sudanese strongman has another goal in mind – ethnic cleansing. 

Bashir says he wants to purify Sudan by driving out the country’s remaining Christians, and aid workers in the Nuba Mountains say that he has begun strategic demonstrations of air power to systematically drive people into the territory of the newly independent South Sudan.

Racho urges Americans act to put pressure on Sudan’s government.

We urge the international community to step up its pressure on Sudan to stop its violent activities. We are extremely concerned by the escalation of violence on the border regions and the continuous bombing campaign by the government of Sudan,” Racho said.


Nigeria blast: We lost over 100 members

The national body of commercial motorcycle operators on Monday said “over 100″ of its members died in the Easter Day blast in Kaduna.

Yesterday (Sunday) was a very dark day. This is because we lost our members and other innocent Nigerians. On the average, over 100 of our members lost their lives,” Secretary-General of the Amalgamated Commercial Motorcycle Owners and Riders Association of Nigeria, Nasir Mamman, told newsmen in Kaduna on Monday. 


Boko Haram fighters invade town in Mali

Boko Haram militants extended their campaign to Mali when they on Monday invaded and controlled the town of Gao in Northern Mali. 

There are a good 100 Boko Haram fighters in Gao. They are Nigerians and from Niger,” Mr Sidibe was quoted to have said to media agencies.

This was confirmed by the Bamako security forces.

Nigeria car bomb: Kaduna blast near Churches kills 38

A suicide car bomber detonated his explosives Sunday morning on a busy road after apparently turning away from attacking Nigerian churches holding Easter services, killing at least 38 people in a massive blast that rattled a city long at the center of religious, ethnic and political violence in the nation.

The blast struck Kaduna, the capital of Kaduna state, leaving charred motorcycles and debris strewn across a major road in the city where many gather to eat at informal restaurants and buy black market gasoline. Nearby hotels and homes had their windows blown out and roofs torn away by the force of the powerful explosion, which engulfed a group of motorcycle taximen.

Market bombing in central Somalia kills 12

At least 12 people have been killed and more than 30 badly injured by a bombing in the central Somali town of Baidoa.

The governor of the Bay region, Abdifitah Mohamed Gesey, told the BBC that most of the casualties were women and children.

Mr Gesey said the bomb was planted in a small basket and hidden in a busy market in the centre of town.

It is the worst attack in Baidoa since Ethiopian troops took control from the Islamist group, al-Shabab, in February.

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

Former Turkish Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz: „Turkish secret agents intentionally started forest fires around Christian monasteries of Greece“

Greek politicians reacted angrily on Monday following the admission by former Turkish Prime Minister Mesut Yilmaz that Turkish secret agents intentionally started forest fires in Greece in the 1990s as part of state-sponsored sabotage.
The claims are not new and were common knowledge on the islands of the eastern Aegean which were particularly hard hit by wildfires in the 1990s. But Yilmaz’s comments -- part of an interview published in the Turkish daily newspaper Birgun over the weekend -- are the first admission by an official source that Ankara was funding subversive activities in Greece.

According to Yilmaz, who served as premier three times in the 1990s, agents of the Turkish secret service set fire to Greek forests during the leadership of his archrival Tansu Ciller, from 1995 to 1998. During that period major forest fires caused huge damage on the islands of the eastern Aegean and in Macedonia.

Islam group urges forest fire Jihad


AUSTRALIA has been singled out as a target for "forest jihad" by a group of Islamic extremists urging Muslims to deliberately light bushfires as a weapon of terror.

US intelligence channels earlier this year identified a website calling on Muslims in Australia, the US, Europe and Russia to "start forest fires", claiming "scholars have justified chopping down and burning the infidels' forests when they do the same to our lands".

The website, posted by a group called the Al-Ikhlas Islamic Network, argues in Arabic that lighting fires is an effective form of terrorism justified in Islamic law under the "eye for an eye" doctrine.

The posting — which instructs jihadis to remember "forest jihad" in summer months — says fires cause economic damage and pollution, tie up security agencies and can take months to extinguish so that "this terror will haunt them for an extended period of time".

"Imagine if, after all the losses caused by such an event, a jihadist organisation were to claim responsibility for the forest fires," the website says. "You can hardly begin to imagine the level of fear that would take hold of people in the United States, in Europe, in Russia and in Australia."

With the nation heading into another hot, dry summer, Australian intelligence agencies are treating the possibility that bushfires could be used as a weapon of terrorism as a serious concern.

Attorney-General Robert McClelland said the Federal Government remained "vigilant against such threats", warning that anyone caught lighting a fire as a weapon of terror would feel the wrath of anti-terror laws.

"Any information that suggests a threat to Australia's interests is investigated by relevant agencies as appropriate," Mr McClelland said.

Adam Dolnik, director of research at the University of Wollongong's Centre for Transnational Crime Prevention, said that bushfires (unlike suicide bombing) were generally not considered a glorious type of attack by jihadis, in keeping with a recent decline in the sophistication of terrorist operations.

"With attacks like bushfires, yes, it would be easy. It would be very damaging and we do see a decreasing sophistication as a part of terrorist attacks," Dr Dolnik said.

"In recent years, there have been quite a few attacks averted and it has become more and more difficult for groups to do something effective."

Dr Dolnik said he had observed an increase in traffic on jihadi websites calling for a simplification of terrorist attacks because the more complex operations had been failing. But starting bushfires was still often regarded as less effective than other operations because governments could easily deny terrorism as the cause.

The internet posting by the little-known group claimed the idea of forest fires had been attributed to imprisoned Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Al-Suri. It said Al-Suri had urged terrorists to use sulphuric acid and petrol to start forest fires.


Danish psychologist: "Muslims are taught to be aggressive, insecure, irresponsible and intolerant"

Interview by Robert Spencer of „Jihad Watch“

Nicolai Sennels regularly contributes to Jihad Watch, with articles on psychology and translations of Scandinavian and German news. To help you get to know Sennels better, we decided to do an interview.

Nicolai Sennels (born 1976) is a Danish psychologist. His first appearances in the Danish media concerned his unorthodox therapy methods that he developed as the only psychologist at S√łnderbro, the youth prison (see here, here, here, here and here). He taught the young prisoners about mindfulness meditation and developed a special program on anger management. Sennels also developed a psychotherapeutic method that focused on teaching criminals with a low understanding of emotions and empathy how to take responsibility for their own behavior. In 2008, the prisoners of S√łnderbro voted the facility as the best prison in Denmark. The leader of Social Services in the Copenhagen municipality concluded that this was due to the work of Nicolai Sennels (Amagerbladet, November 3, 2008).

At a conference on immigrant crime in 2008, arranged by the Copenhagen municipality, Sennels said that one should not use the term “criminal immigrants,” but “criminal Muslims,” since the majority of criminal immigrants have Muslim backgrounds. Seven out of ten inmates in the Danish youth prisons have immigrant backgrounds, and almost all of them are Muslims. Sennels was threatened that if he were to discuss his experiences, he would risk losing his job. This story developed into a national debate on the freedom of speech and became a widely discussed topic in the Danish media (please see here and here), and the Minister of Integration joined the discussion.

Sennels decided to publish a book on his experiences, Among Criminal Muslims. A Psychologist's Experiences from the Copenhagen Municipality, which was well received in both the official Psychologists Union's magazine and the newspapers. He found himself a new appointment at the Danish Ministry of Defense, and now once again he works as a psychologist for children and teenagers.

Sennels consulted on the case against Omar Khadr, a convicted terrorist serving in Guantanamo. He also contributed a chapter to the Dutch book Islam: Critical Essays on a Political Religion, along with Raymond Ibrahim, Hans Jansen, Michael Mannheimer, Ibn Warraq, Bat Ye’or and other renowned critics of Islam and Muslim immigration. 

Spencer: Nicolai, people know you mainly for your articles on the psychological differences between Muslims and Westerners (please see here and here). You have also contributed your professional insights in the case against the Guantanamo prisoner Omar Khadr. You wrote several articles, as well as a book on your conclusions. Could you give us a brief account of your findings? 

Sennels: There are many differences between people brought up as Muslims and those who are brought up as Westerners. I identified four main differences that are important in order to understand the behavior of Muslims. They concern anger, self-confidence, the so-called "locus of control" and identity.

Westerners are brought up to think of anger as a sign of weakness, powerlessness and lack of self-control. "Big dogs don't have to bark," as we say in Denmark. In Muslim culture, anger is seen as a sign of strength. To Muslims, being aggressive is in itself an argument and a way of gaining respect. But we should not be impressed when we see pictures of bearded men hopping up and down, shouting like animals and shooting in the air. We should take it for what it is: the local madhouse passing by.

In Western culture, self-confidence is connected with the ability to meet criticism calmly and to respond rationally. We are raised to see people who easily get angry when criticized, as insecure and immature. In Muslim culture it is the opposite; it is honorable to respond aggressively and to engage in a physical fight in order to scare or force critics to withdraw, even if this results in a prison sentence or even death. They see non-aggressive responses to such threats and violence as a sign of a vulnerability that is to be exploited. They do not interpret a peaceful response as an invitation to enter into a dialogue, diplomacy, intellectual debate, compromise or peaceful coexistence.

"Locus of control" is a term used in psychology, and relates to the way in which people feel that their lives are controlled. In Western culture, we are brought up to have an "inner locus of control," meaning that we see our own inner emotions, reactions, decisions and views as the main deciding factor in our lives. There may be outer circumstances that influence our situation, but in the end, it is our own perception of a situation and the way we handle it that decides our future and our state of mind. The "inner locus of control" leads to increased self-responsibility and motivates people to become able to solve their own problems. Muslims are brought up to have an "outer locus of control." Their constant use of the term inshallah ("Allah willing") when talking about the future, as well as the fact that most aspects of their lives are decided by outer traditions and authorities, leaves very little space for individual freedom. Independent initiatives are often severely punished. This shapes their way of thinking, and means that when things go wrong, it is always the fault of others or the situation. Unfortunately, many Westerners go overboard with their self-responsibility and start to take responsibility for others' behavior as well. The mix of many Westerners being overly forgiving, their flexible attitude, and Muslim self-pity and blame is the psychological crowbar that has opened the West to Islamization. Our overly protective welfare system shields immigrants from noticing the consequences of their own misbehavior and thereby learning from their mistakes and motivating them to improve.

Finally, identity plays a big role when it comes to psychological differences between Muslims and Westerners. Westerners are taught to be open and tolerant toward other cultures, races, religions, etc. This makes us less critical, impairs our ability to discriminate, and makes our societies open to the influence of other cultural trends and values that may not always be constructive. Muslims, on the other hand, are taught again and again that they are superior, and that all others are so bad that Allah will throw them in hell when they die. While most Westerners find national and cultural pride embarrassing, Muslim culture's self-glorification, massive use of inbreeding, the rule that only Muslims can marry Muslims and their all-pervading social control function as self-protecting mechanisms on the levels of culture and identity. 

In general, Westerners are taught to be kind, self-assured, self-responsible and tolerant, while Muslims are taught to be aggressive, insecure, irresponsible and intolerant. 

Spencer: That reminds me of my interactions with the likes of Reza Aslan, Salam al-Marayati, Moustafa Zayed, Ahmed Rehab, Mohamed Elibiary, Ahmed Afzaal, Omid Safi, Ibrahim Hooper, Caner K. Dagli, Haroon S. Moghul, Nadir Ahmed, and so many others. Can you give a psychological explanation as to why so few Muslims integrate into our societies? 

Sennels: Integration is dependent on motivation, freedom and intelligence. In other words, immigrants have to want to integrate, be allowed to by their family and friends, and mentally have to be able to do this.

People coming from cultures that are aimed mainly at physical survival, and in which religious practice and adherence to cultural traditions give more social status than having a good education and being self-supporting, usually are not very productive if they can live on the state. If on top of that, they can live in closed communities among others with the same culture and language, there is very little reason for them to get involved in our society. The only solution is to make the lack of integration so unpractical and economically non-beneficial that the only attractive choice is to receive our offer of state-sponsored repatriation. 

As history and Muslim societies have show us time and time again, there is no need for more bloody examples before the majority does as expected. Muslim societies only have to kill, rape, incarcerate, kidnap and beat a few, before the rest "voluntarily" prefer Sharia to integration.

Thirdly, handling intellectually demanding jobs in our high-tech societies, is not easy for people brought up to believe that the Qur'an and Hadith, not school and science, has the answers. Being brought up in a Muslim family also makes it difficult to adapt to Western social conduct at workplaces, including contact between the sexes and emotional control. The fact that almost half of all Muslims are inbred, often many generations in a row, also does not increase cognitive abilities. In most cases, our workplaces demand that the employees are able to take initiative and be creative and self-responsible, which are all human qualities that are not welcomed among people who are first of all expected to blindly submit and who live in surroundings that punish independent thinking and behavior, sometimes even with death. 

Spencer: As a psychologist, what is your explanation as to why Muslims oppress women? 

Sennels: I see two psychological explanations for the oppression of women in Islam.

John Adams, the USA's 2nd president, said that he studied warfare so that his children could study agriculture and their children could study art. Abraham Maslow formulated a similar idea, the "hierarchy of needs," which shows how we aim toward a state of full development, possessing complete inner and outer freedoms, spontaneous playful creativity and love for all.

While Adams's and Maslow's views describe the goals and aims of our Western society beautifully as the full development of an individual’s potential, they do not apply to Islam or Muslim tradition. The aim of Islam and Muslims is dominance, not self-realization. Islam and Muslim culture is an aggressive movement, and giving space to female qualities such as sensitivity and empathy would be a hindrance, since it would allow for less aggressive human tendencies to emerge. Diplomacy, compromise, tolerance, democracy, compassion, sensitivity and empathy have to be locked away both on an internal and external level. On the outside, the oppression of women limits their influence, and their aversion against femininity in the outer world helps Muslims to also repress it inside themselves on the psychological level. Oppression of women is thus a psychological method of hardening a culture on the outside and people on the inside.

The other reason why Muslims oppress women and female sexuality, is the fact that women are simply stronger when it comes to sex. And it does not work for omnipotent, jealous and insecure Muslim macho-men that they in the most naked and vulnerable situation of all are the weaker party. Muslim men compensate this by oppressing their women and locking them up in apartments and ugly clumsy garments. The more embarrassing it is for the man that the woman is stronger in this essential aspect of life, the more he must dominate her in daily life. I had contact with two prostitutes who both said that Arab men did not last very long in bed. In many Muslim societies, a women's ability to enjoy sex is simply destroyed by a knife or a piece of glass. The jealous fantasy of the man not being able to satisfy his lustful wife, who therefore looks down on him and may even go to other men to gain satisfaction, is an ongoing source of torment for the wanna-be almighty Muslim man.

True love can only exist on the basis of respect and equality. Muslim societies are therefore full of men and women who never experienced true, satisfying and giving love. The emotional and sexual frustration that results from the inequality of the sexes and being forced to marry a partner that one does not love surely contribute to the aggression and emotional immaturity that Muslims display whenever they are numerous enough to feel that such behavior is acceptable. As one said, "forced marriage is the earthquake and what follows is a tsunami of domestic abuse, sexual abuse, child protection issues, suicide and murder." 

Spencer: Why do you think that Muslims living in the West are statistically more criminal and violent than others? 

Sennels: Well, there are several reasons. Firstly, the Islamic scriptures teach them that attacking and robbing non-Muslims is completely okay. Muslim culture's degrading view of non-Muslims functions in the same way as war propaganda. By hearing again and again how evil, disgusting and unworthy the enemy is, empathy is removed, aggression is strengthened, and the step towards harming the perceived enemy becomes smaller. The Qur'an and the Hadith are criminal books that allow and even force people to undertake criminal acts.

The psychological differences that I mentioned before also play a role when it comes to the high crime rate among Muslims. Our diplomatic and tolerant attitude is simply perceived as weakness and exploitable vulnerability. We may not like it, but we Westerners must abandon our peaceful, dialogue seeking and politically correct ways if we hope to communicate with Muslim society. Otherwise, they will think we are too scared to risk a conflict. They simply do not respect to or understand our preferred ways of communicating.

Finally, most Muslims are unable to earn real respect from us. Their immature behavior, their lack of contribution to the community and their lack of success makes them look like real losers in the eyes of civilized modern people. And it is not easy to belong to Allah's chosen people, who are supposedly better than the rest of the lot, when in fact they come in last every time. So, because of the lack of well-earned respect, and because of not being able to discriminate between the two, they try to be feared instead. It is Muslims, not Westerners, who invented the word Islamophobia. They want us to be afraid. But we are not. We feel sick of all their parasitism, violent behavior and mistreatment of their women. We have Islamonausea. 

Spencer: Is there a psychological explanation as to why political correctness is still so widespread, in spite of the obvious evidence that Islam is an aggressive ideology and Muslim immigration is eroding our societies and destroying our economy? 

Sennels: Yes, there is. As I already mentioned, we Westerners are brought up to think that tolerance and openness are positive human qualities. For a long time, we did not have to be aware that such qualities are only a strength as long as nobody wants to harm us. In our meeting with Islam and Muslim immigration, our biggest strength -- our willingness to be open towards the new, that made us so curious and inventive and therefore knowledgeable and rich -- has become our worst enemy.

In my article "Psychological explanations of Political Correctness," I go through the most important social psychological explanations on irrational herd behavior. The most important are the bystander effect and pluralistic ignorance.

The bystander effect is when a person uses another reaction to assess a situation. If others do not react, it is interpreted as a sign that the situation is not serious and that there is no need to act. That is why we need more people to act, and in good style.

Pluralistic ignorance appears when people know that there is a problembut feel that it would be embarrassing to point it out. Leftists screaming "racist," the general view that it is impolite to point out obvious weaknesses in others and our culture's definition of good people as being open and tolerant, makes many people keep their mouths shut and even doubt their own sense and senses. When a majority of people, as a result of insecurity and wanting to be a "good person," do not speak their mind, the result is pluralistic ignorance. The famous Danish fairytale about the Emperor's New Clothes is an excellent example.

In the end, it comes down to cowardliness and wanting to be a good person in the eyes of others. Compassion for 700 million women who cannot chose their own sexual partners, clothing or lifestyle, as well as an openly declared war on our values and countries, the quick decay of our big cities into Sharia colonies, and the destruction of our economy as a result of Muslim immigration apparently do not count. 

Spencer: Besides writing about psychology, you also write and translate articles on Muslim criminals, politics etc. Are you just a critic of Islam who happens to be a psychologist? 

Sennels: No, I am a psychologist who through his work with Muslims became aware of how big a mistake it is to allow Muslim immigration and the spread of Islam in our societies. Together with overpopulation, which should be taken care of by using the enormous amounts of foreign aid to pay people who have less money, this problem is the most dangerous threat to world peace today. It has now been several decades since we passed the stage at which the problem could be solved without blood, sweat and tears.

I have dedicated my life to making people aware of the danger that is already gnawing off big chunks of our cities, economy and freedom.

The most embarrassing thing I can imagine is that the only place in this universe with intelligent life will end as a planet-sized khalifat floating around in space. Just like the bad guys in The Lord of the Rings, Star Wars and other archetypal stories of good and evil, Islam does not strive for freedom, happiness and love. Islam strives for the submission of Muslims to Allah and of non-Muslims to Muslims -- a dark, cold and humorless world where men are forced to mistreat their women and everybody is a slave to a god whose only wish is the enforcement of Sharia down to the very last comma. They do what they can to reach their final solution, and we must do what we can to prevent it from happening. 

Spencer: You have several years of experience in writing and debating on Islam. You have participated in intellectual debates on Danish national TV and national radio about Islam and Muslim immigration. Many people are critical of Sharia and immigration, but do know dare to speak out -- or they are not sure how to express their views. Do you have any advice to people who feel like that? 

Sennels: If we have compassion, people will feel it. Criticizing Islam is like shooting fish in a barrel, but we are not intellectual sadists. We are worried about the freedom of our women and the future of our children, and about our constitutions. And we know that the first and in many cases also the biggest victims of Islam are Muslims. We do not even have to use words like Islam or Muslims. We can just say that religions that oppress women and start holy wars make us sick. If you know that you are right, you do not have to be nervous or ashamed of yourself. Know that our politicians and media aim for the soft middle in society in order to be reelected and to sell newspapers and ads, and it is therefore up to ordinary people to protect our values, society and constitution.

Inform yourself and spread what you find out via email, social media, blogs and letters to the editor and to our politicians and journalists. When among others, the most important thing is that you do not force your view upon them and are happy and relaxed when you express your opinions. Only share your knowledge and your feelings when it feels natural -- wait until others mention the topic and use only a few words unless people really ask you several times what you think. If you are good, you can even use humor.

And do not fear to lose a few politically correct friends on the way. They will thank you in the end.

Sudan’s Aerial Bombing Aims at Churches in Nuba Mountains

After Khartoum denied that it had bombed civilians earlier this month, Sudanese aerial strikes last week were aimed at church buildings and schools in Kauda, South Kordofan state, a humanitarian aid worker said.

Antonov airplanes dropped bombs on Thursday and Friday (March 22 and 23), destroying some houses and cattle near the church buildings and schools but causing no casualties, he said.

Humanitarian agencies consider the Islamic government’s targeting of civilians in the Nuba Mountains, which has a large Christian population, an “ethnic cleansing” against non-Arab peoples in the multi-ethnic state, with the added incentive of ridding the area of Christians, he said.

Salafist leaders celebrate ceath of Coptic Pope in Egypt

As Christians across Egypt continued to mourn the loss of Pope Shenouda III t, Islamist leaders of the Salafist movement issued a litany of insults, calling the late leader of the Coptic Orthodox Church the “head of the infidels” and thanking God for his death.

The vitriol indicated the level of hostility the Salafists, who now make up 20 percent of Egypt’s parliament, have toward Christians. In a recorded message released on the Facebook page of one leading Salafi teacher, Sheik Wagdy Ghoneim, the sheik celebrated the pontiff’s death.

Egypt’s Coptic Christians boycott constitutional panel over Islamist influence

The Arab Spring has led to a dismantling of the Egyptian government and fears over minority rights in the Middle Eastern nation. Shortly after the initial protests that led to former President Hosni Mubarak ouster, Coptic Christians had deadly run-ins with military leaders.

Recently, The Blaze highlighted the ongoing assault against Christians in detail. Now, with Islamists taking control of the Egyptian parliament and with an impending presidential election, the Coptic Orthodox church is taking a stand.

(Related: Muslim Brotherhood Reverses Course, Will Run Its Own Candidate for President in Egypt)

According to AFP, the church will boycott an Islamist-dominated panel that has been tasked with putting together the nation’s future constitution. The current commission has 100 members who were selected by the parliament to examine the issue. The parliament, of course, is predominantly made up of Islamists from the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists.

Rather than keeping its two church members on the committee, the Holy Synod has decided, unanimously, to remove them from the discussions. According to a report from the MENA news agency, the church believes that it’s “inappropriate to continue to be represented given the reservations of various political forces on how the constitutional commission was composed.”

These withdrawals come as some individuals are claiming that they are being used, AFP reports, as “collateral” for Islamists seeking to infuse the new constitution with their political ideology. The Christians’ decision comes following Pope Shenouda III’s death. Shenouda, the leader of the Coptic church, often acted to protect the religious minority.

Unease grows over Islamist political agenda in Egypt

The Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups in Egypt are flexing their growing political muscle. They control the legislative agenda in parliament, and in recent weeks introduced controversial proposals to curb social freedoms and legal rights.

Islamist lawmakers also handpicked a 100-member panel that began meeting this week to write a new constitution, which is widely expected to enshrine Islamic law.

Even so, Islamist leaders say they want Egypt to remain a secular state. But many secular Egyptians are not convinced.

Salwa Gerges is one of many Egyptians at an outdoor clothing market in Cairo nervous about the Islamist politicians' plans.

The 46-year-old Coptic Christian housewife says she has a hard time believing the politicians embrace secularism and diversity. She points to one Islamist lawmaker who recently proposed adopting punishments prescribed by religious law, such as cutting off limbs.

Fellow shopper Mona El Shazly is also annoyed with what she sees as the mixed messages coming from the Islamists.

The nursery school owner and conservative Muslim complains that Islamists have done nothing to fix Egypt's deteriorating economy and security. Instead, she says, the Islamists come up with misguided proposals like stripping foreign-language instruction from Egyptian primary schools.

Islamist lawmaker Mohammed El Kordy introduced that measure last month. In a televised session, he argued that teaching foreign languages leads to Egyptian children embracing the West.