Hannity Guest Mike Ghouse Responds to Logan’s Warning with ANOTHER IslamoCON!

On July 4Th I posted the following article: “My Challenge to Frequent Sean Hannity Guest Mike Ghouse”. On July 6Th Ghouse left the following comment here.

“Mike Ghouse on July 6, 2011 at 6:32 am



Mike Ghouse”

Tonight he sent me the following email:

I will send you the full response… in the next 30 minutes
hope you would publish it… we owe to ourselves and the public to dialogue and search for the truth.


Mike Ghouse

Mike is an interfaith speaker. But most of the regular readers here know the brutal truth about Islam, and will see right through his IslamoCON.

My Challenge to Frequent Sean Hannity Guest Mike Ghouse

Facts don’t matter to some.

I am pleased to respond to Logan’s challenge on the net hoping he and his friends will be open to seeing another point of view. I pray that he and his friends read this with an open mind and an open heart. (of the 3200 words nearly 2400 are quotes from Quraan)

Facts do matter. That is why I back up my statements about Islam with quotes from the Koran, and Sahih (authentic) Bukhari and Muslim ahadith. Is Sahih in front of your name Mike Ghouse? I don’t think so!

Each one of us bears responsibility to do his or her share of work in creating cohesive societies where everyone feels safe and secure, and trust one another to make life easier for one and the others. You and I are responsible for our own actions and we have to do our share of good in creating such societies. We have a choice not do a thing and not hear from any.

Muslims cannot be trusted, as the Islamic scriptures instruct them to lie.

Muslim Hadith Book 032, Number 6303:

Humaid b. ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Auf reported that his mother Umm Kulthum daughter of ‘Uqba b. Abu Mu’ait, and she was one amongst the first emigrants who pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him), as saying that she heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A liar is not one who tries to bring reconciliation amongst people and speaks good (in order to avert dispute), or he conveys good. Ibn Shihab said he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).

Back to Mike.

Just around the crusades, the European kings commissioned a hostile Quran translationto foster warfare against Muslim invaders to get their subject to go fight for them. Then after the fall of Ottoman Empire, a Muslim turns around and produced a hostile translation of Quran to inflame Muslims against Christians and Jews.


Religions were introduced to bring sanity to people, most people get it and few don’t. There are a few Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Jews and others who don’t get their religion and resort to oppression and hate mongering without realizing it. If they spend their energy on building peace we will have a much better society to live.

Did Mohammad the rapist not know his own religion?

Koran verse 033:050
YUSUFALI: O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Let’s see what else Goose had to say.

Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, Brigitte Gabriel, Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, Alan Dershowitz, Ali Sina and a host of others are guided by those translations and it suits them to sell hate and frightened nincompoops write those checks.

Labels and and insults, the sign of a weak argument Mike.

I am willing to discuss this further, if there is intellectual discussion without judgments, if not, don’t expect me to correspond any further. I have referenced some material below where a few men have run off instead of dealing with the issues they raised.

Mike Ghouse

Sorry Mike, you will be judged!

Mike said:

From the article published at Logan’s challenge, https://loganswarning.com/2011/07/04/my-challenge-to-frequent-sean-hannity-guest-mike-ghouse/. I have quoted critical paragraphs and responded as diligently as I can.

“Koran 009.029 – YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Although Yusuf Ali’s translation is the first one in English by a Muslim, Muhammad Asad’s translation is closer to meaning than Yusuf Ali and I have opted to go with Asad’s translation locatable at: http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/

9:29 (Asad) [And] fight against those who – despite having been vouchsafed revelation [aforetime] [40] -do not [truly] believe either in God or the Last Day, and do not consider forbidden that which God and His Apostle have forbidden, [41] and do not follow the religion of truth [which God has enjoined upon them] [42] till they [agree to] pay the exemption tax with a willing hand, after having been humbled [in war]. [43]

For the record Asad was a Jew who converted to Islam in 1926. Mike, even though Asad tries to soften it up, the version of 9:29 you supplied also calls for the dominance of non-Muslims. Thank you!

Here is another translation.

Tafsir al-Jalalayn

Tafsir al-Jalalayn is one of the most significant tafsirs for the study of the Qur’an. Composed by the two “Jalals” — Jalal al-Din al-Mahalli (d. 864 ah / 1459 ce) and his pupil Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911 ah / 1505 ce), Tafsir al-Jalalayn is generally regarded as one of the most easily accessible works of Qur’anic exegesis because of its simple style and one volume length.

{ قَاتِلُواْ ٱلَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِ وَلاَ بِٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلآخِرِ وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ ٱلْحَقِّ مِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ ٱلْكِتَابَ حَتَّىٰ يُعْطُواْ ٱلْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ }

Fight those who do not believe in God, nor in the Last Day, for, otherwise, they would have believed in the Prophet (s), and who do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden, such as wine, nor do they practise the religion of truth, the firm one, the one that abrogated other religions, namely, the religion of Islam —from among of those who (min, ‘from’, explains [the previous] alladhīna, ‘those who’) have been given the Scripture, namely, the Jews and the Christians, until they pay the jizya tribute, the annual tax imposed them, readily (‘an yadin is a circumstantial qualifier, meaning, ‘compliantly’, or ‘by their own hands’, not delegating it [to others to pay]), being subdued, [being made] submissive and compliant to the authority of Islam.

Moving on.

[40] Lit., “such of those who were vouchsafed revelation [aforetime] as do not believe…” etc. In accordance with the fundamental principle-observed throughout my interpretation of the Qur’an -that all of its statements and ordinances are mutually complementary and cannot, therefore, be correctly understood unless they are considered as parts of one integral whole, this verse, too must be read in the context of the clear-cut Qur’anic rule that war is permitted only in self-defense (see 2:190-194, and the corresponding notes).

The Koran states Muslims can wage war for being “oppressed”.

Koran 008.039
YUSUFALI: And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.

Being “oppressed” can easily mean not being allowed to practice Sharia Law.

(Washington DC Imam: Muslims in America are Oppressed~ Video ~ can be viewed HERE.)

In other words, the above injunction to fight is relevant only in the event of aggression committed against the Muslim community or state, or in the presence of an unmistakable threat to its security: a view which has been shared by that great Islamic thinker, Muhammad `Abduh. Commenting on this verse, he declared: “Fighting has been made obligatory in Islam only for the sake of defending the truth and its followers…. All the campaigns of the Prophet were defensive in character; and so were the wars undertaken by the Companions in the earliest period [of Islam]” (Manar X, 332). (Quran Ref: 9:29)

Great Islamic thinker Bukhari stated that Mohammed called for perpetual war.

Bukhari Hadith Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:

Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’ And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah.” Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik, “O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?” He replied, “Whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah’, faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have.”

More from Ghouse.

[41] This, to my mind, is the key-phrase of the above ordinance. The term “apostle” is obviously used here in its generic sense and applies to all the prophets on whose teachings the beliefs of the Jews and the Christians are supposed to be based – in particular, to Moses and (in the case of the Christians) to Jesus as well (Manar X, 333 and 337). Since, earlier in this sentence, the people alluded to are accused of so grave a sin as willfully refusing to believe in God and the Last Day (i.e., in life after death and man’s individual responsibility for his doings on earth), it is inconceivable that they should subsequently be blamed for comparatively minor offences against their religious law: consequently, the stress on their “not forbidding that which God and His apostle have forbidden” must refer to something which is as grave, or almost as grave, as disbelief in God.

Grave sin? It is called freedom of choice, and as for your Islamic judgment day. It is disgraceful!

Muslim Hadith Book 041, Number 6985: Book 041, Number 6985:

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.

Your true colors are starting to show Mike…

In the context of an ordinance enjoining war against them. this “something” can mean only one thing-namely, unprovoked aggression: for it is this that has been forbidden by God through all the apostles who were entrusted with conveying His message to man. Thus, the above verse must be understood as a call to the believers to fight against such-and only such-of the nominal followers of earlier revelation as deny their own professed beliefs by committing aggression against the followers of the Qur’an (cf. Manar X, 338).(Quran Ref: 9:29 )

I already explained Muslims can wage war for being “oppressed”. Is the anti-Sharia legislation that is being introduced across the country “oppressive”, to those who want Sharia?

[42] See in this connection the statement (in 5:13-14) that the Jews and the Christians “have forgotten much of what they had been told to bear in mind”. (Quran Ref: 9:29)

[43] Sc., “and having become incorporated in the Islamic state”. The term Jizya, rendered by me as “exemption tax”, occurs in the Qur’an only once, but its meaning and purpose have been fully explained in many authentic Traditions. It is intimately bound up with the concept of the Islamic state as an ideological organization: and this is a point which must always be borne in mind if the real purport of this tax is to be understood. In the Islamic state, every able-bodied Muslim is obliged to take up arms in jihad (i.e., in a just war in God’s cause) whenever the freedom of his faith or the political safety of his community is imperiled: in other words, every able-bodied Muslim is liable to compulsory military service. Since this is, primarily, a religious obligation, non-Muslim citizens, who do not subscribe to the ideology of Islam, cannot in fairness be expected to assume a similar burden. On the other hand, they must be accorded full protection of all their civic rights and of their religious freedom: and it is in order to compensate the Muslim community for this unequal distribution of civic burdens that a special tax is levied on non-Muslim citizens (ahl adh-dhimmah, lit., “covenanted” [or “protected”] people”, i.e., non-Muslims whose safety is statutorily assured by the Muslim community).

In an Islamic state non-Muslims do NOT have the same level of freedom of religion, or rights as Muslims do. They have less rights. Why did you leave this part out Mike? The proof can be seen HERE. Jizya is no better than Mafia type extortion. It is a “protection” from Muslims themselves.

Thus, Jizya is no more and no less than an exemption tax in lieu of military service and in compensation for the “covenant of protection” (dhimmah) accorded to such citizens by the Islamic state. (The term itself is derived from the verb jaza, “he rendered [something] as a satisfaction”, or “as a compensation [in lieu of something else]” – cf. Lane II, 422.) No fixed rate has been set either by the Qur’an or by the Prophet for this tax; but from all available Traditions it is evident that it is to be considerably lower than the tax called zakah (“the purifying dues”) to which Muslims are liable and which – because it is a specifically Islamic religious duty-is naturally not to be levied on non-Muslims.

Once again, you “forgot” the part about non-Muslims having 2nd class citizenship that comes along with paying jizya.

Here is a history lesson you Ghouse.

The Christians of Najran, Medina, refused conversion to Islam in 631 A.D. and offered Mohamad to maintain their faith, accept the dominance of Muslims and pay an annual tribute (the jizya), he accepted and the pact was sealed between them.

Moving along:

Only such of the non-Muslim citizens who, if they were Muslims, would be expected to serve in the armed forces of the state are liable to the payment of Jizya, provided that they can easily afford it. Accordingly, all non-Muslim citizens whose personal status or condition would automatically free them from the obligation to render military service are statutorily – that is, on the basis of clear-cut ordinances promulgated by the Prophet-exempted from the payment of Jizya: (a) all women, (b) males who have not yet reached full maturity, (c) old men, (d) all sick or crippled men, (e) priests and monks. All non-Muslim citizens who volunteer for military service are obviously exempted from the payment of Jizya. My rendering of the expression `an yad (lit., “out of hand”) as “with a willing hand”, that is, without reluctance, is based on one of several explanations offered by Zamakhshari in his commentary on the above verse. Rashid Rida’, taking the word yad in its metaphorical significance of “power” or “ability”, relates the phrase can yad to the financial ability of the person liable to the payment of Jizya (see Manar X, 342): an interpretation which is undoubtedly justified in view of the accepted definition of this tax.(Quran Ref: 9:29 )

Mike wants us to concentrate on the non-military aspect, and not on the 2nd class citizenship aspect that he conveniently leaves out. Do any of the readers see Mike condemning jizya? I don’t! Ghouse, try and force jizya on America…

Ghouse said:

As individuals we are responsible to create cohesive societies where everyone feels secure and trusts one another to make life easier for the self and others. You and I are responsible for our own actions. In our solitude if we reflect, or on the day of accountability, we are to account for our karma. That puts the responsibility on you and I to speak out when there is injustice, when there is falsehood and when there is oppression and I am doing my share of the work.

Islam is injustice and oppression. I don’t see you speaking out against it.

More from Ghouse…

There is just one creator; there is no such thing as Christian God or Muslim God that is sheer ignorance. God is not a being, not a thing with specific characteristics to limit his acceptance to the universe.

They are not the same “Creator” as Koran verse 9:29 calls for the dominance of Christians, and the Islamic scriptures also state that Jesus will come back as a Muslim and destroy Christainity. I am pretty sure the “Creator” of Christainity would not want the religion he or she started to be destroyed.

Ghouse goes on…

Jesus represents hope for humanity, when things are rough, when people are creating division, hating each other, bombing each other and become revenge seeking, they are simply reacting. As humans we hope for a just and peaceful world and that hope is anchored in Jesus, his re-appearance gives us hope and salvation from the hatefulness that has permeated in the society. When good becomes a common place, it simply means evil is subsided or gone.

Islam allows terrorism and rape. That is evil!

I know, this is taking longer than the Hannity show itself.

MG goes on:

Since Jesus is the promised Messiah predicted in Islam, the right wing Christian assumes that Jesus is a Muslim (p0litical) and will destroy them, as the Logan website writes it up. Likewise the right wing Muslim believes that when Jesus takes out the evil, he took out Christianity. How ignorant are some of these folks.

I am not religius so save the talking point for someone else. The Islamic scriptures back up my statement about Jesus coming back and destroying Christainity.

Bukhari Hadith Volume 4, Book 55, Number 657:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah’s Apostle said, “By Him in Whose Hands my soul is, surely (Jesus,) the son of Mary will soon descend amongst you and will judge mankind justly (as a Just Ruler); he will break the Cross and kill the pigs and there will be no Jizya (i.e. taxation taken from non Muslims). Money will be in abundance so that nobody will accept it, and a single prostration to Allah (in prayer) will be better than the whole world and whatever is in it.” Abu Huraira added “If you wish, you can recite (this verse of the Holy Book): — ‘And there is none Of the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (i.e Jesus as an Apostle of Allah and a human being) Before his death. And on the Day of Judgment He will be a witness Against them.” (4.159) (See Fateh Al Bari, Page 302 Vol 7)

In case you missed it Sahih Mike, that was from Sahih Bukhari. Oops….sorry you are not a Sahih. You are not an Islamic authority figure.

MG said:

Destroying Christianity is the manufacture of right wing Christians and right wing Muslims and they do not represent the majority of Christians and Muslims.

I already proved your statement to be false. It also appears that “peaceful” Mike has issues with conservative Christians.

MG said:

First of all, the spiritual aspect of every religion brings goodness to humanity, the insecurity in weak men of religion causes division, mine is better than yours. Historically, Islam did not exist during the time of Jesus, if it was, he would have talked about it, as he was a pluralist. Christianity did not exist during the times of Moses, if not Moses would have delivered the New Testament as well. Both Christianity and Judaism did exist during the times of the Prophet Muhammad and both are respectfully talked about in Islam and Quraan.

Let’s try reality Ghouse. Calling for the dominance of Jews and Christians is not being respectful, and neither is this.

Koran verse 009.030
YUSUFALI: The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

MG said:

I don’t know how knowledgeable you are, but it is a requirement for Muslims to believe in Moses, Jesus and all the prophets of Old Testament. Indeed, one’ faith is incomplete without that belief. Add to this, the Prophet tells his followers not to treat one prophet to be superior over the other – Islam was not Muhammad’s religion, it was a universal idea to bring peace to humanity through the removal of arrogance. He did not want people to worship him, he never claimed to be divine, in fact he said, I am just like you, a mortal being, when I die, bury me in an unmarked grave.. He insisted that no one paint his picture, lest someone starts worshipping him rather than God. That was the best example of humility of the Prophet.

I am knowledgeable enough to tear apart your IslamoCON, like I told you I would in my return email tonight. I already proved Islam has a different version of Jesus than Christianity. For the record you are very arrogant, and the readers will see your attitude get worse in upcoming quotes from you. Practice what you preace Ghouse.

When mad Mo was raping those sex slaves, was he practicing humility? Do you condemn him for being a rapist? Or do you lack the moral courage to do so Mike?

MG said:

Christianity or Judaism does not say that their religion is not superior to any, then why do you expect Islam to say that, that is hypocrisy, is it not?

Point outing what the Islamic scriptures state is not hypocrisy. You are VERY DESPERATE in your attempt to downplay Koran verse 9:29.

MG said:

However, read these verses;

[2:136] Say, “We believe in GOD, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters.”

[21:47] we will establish the scales of justice on the Day of Resurrection. No soul will suffer the least injustice. Even the equivalent of a mustard seed will be accounted for. We are the most efficient reckoners.

[2:148] each of you chooses the direction to follow; you shall race towards righteousness. Wherever you may be, GOD will summon you all. GOD is Omnipotent.

[10:99] had your Lord willed, all the people on earth would have believed. Do you want to force the people to become believers?

[4:123] it is not in accordance with your wishes, or the wishes of the people of the scripture: anyone who commits evil pays for it, and will have no helper or supporter against GOD.

5:8 (Asad) O YOU who have attained to faith! Be ever steadfast in your devotion to God, bearing witness to the truth in all equity; and never let hatred of any-one [19] lead

[49:13] O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of GOD is the most righteous. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant you into the sin of deviating from justice. Be just: this is closest to being God-conscious. And remain conscious of God: verily, God is aware of all that you do.

[22:17] Those who believe, those who are Jewish, the converts, the Christians, the Zoroastrians, and the idol worshipers, GOD is the One who will judge among them on the Day of Resurrection. GOD witnesses all things.

[2:62] Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the Christians, and the converts; anyone who (1) believes in GOD, and (2) believes in the Last Day, and (3) leads a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.

Quraan also tells that one can marry a Jewish or Christian woman without converting.

Those verses do not erase 9:29 , and I already supplied the link showing that Islam calls for the dominance of Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians.

How about a Muslim woman being allowed to marry a non-Muslim? Sounds fair to me. Of couse Mike does not condemn the one-way street. His IslamoCOLORS are showing again.

Arrogant Mike said: (Yes everyone, he is almost done.)

Mr. Simpleton, when you rape, murder, cheat and loot, you are affecting the civil balance of a society. It is the society that judges you and hauls your heinie to the jail. Whereas, God judges your belief in oneness of God, humanity and the universe. He gives ample opportunities to repent. God loves those who repent and put themselves on moral high grounds.

Thanks for the insult. Mohammad was a rapist, murderer, and plunder. Did he affect the civil balance of society? HE SURE DID!

Arrogant Mike said:

American Muslims have placed their trust in the American justice system; the civil laws of our nation provide ample justice. The Muslim majority in America is happy with the American system and does not want to have Sharia law here in America. Check the link below on Sharia.

They have no choice, and you are not the spokesperson for Muslims in America. So do not pretend to be. The Sharia movement within America is well documented on my site, and there is no major Muslim lead movement against it.

Arrogant Mike said:

Have you ever read his book (Imam Feisal), “What is right with Islam is right with America”? If you send me an email with your address, I will have a copy of that book mailed to you. Sharia simply means living by rules and it has two sides to it; personal and public. Imam Feisal was referring to Personal Sharia. Is there is a nation, including our own, where laws are always just? The stoning of adulterers is wrong, the punishment for Blasphemy is wrong… neither of them are in Quraan. Go fact check – the number of adulterers stoned to death number less than the deaths we executed in Texas and none need to be singled out, and both need to be condemned.

Yea, I am going to give you my address. As for the rest, you are wrong. He wants full Sharia. From the Jordanian paper al-Ghad.

Here it is in Arabic.

عندما يكون لأحد ما شكوى في الشرق الأوسط، ويقول “أنه يجب أن يكون هناك قانون”، فهو يعرف أن هذا القانون موجود. القانون الوحيد الذي يحتاجه المسلم موجود في القرآن الكريم والحديث الشريف. لقد سألني الناس مباشرة بعد هجمة الحادي عشر من أيلول/سبتمبر لماذا تتخذ الحركات العديدة ذات الأجندات السياسية أسماء دينية؟ لماذا تسمى “الأخوان المسلمين” أو “حزب الله” أو “حماس” أو حركة المقاومة الإسلامية؟ أجيبهم أن التوجه الإسلامي نحو القانون والعدالة يبدأ باللغة الدينية لأن الحركات العلمانية قد فشلت في إيصال ما يريده المسلمون، وهو الحياة والحرية والسعي وراء السعادة.

Here is the paragraph translated to English.

“People asked me right after the 9/11 attacks as to why do movements with political agendas carry [Islamic] religious names? Why call it ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ or ‘Hezbollah (Party of Allah)’ or ‘Hamas’ or ‘Islamic Resistance Movement’? I answer them this — that the trend towards Islamic law and justice begins in religious movements, because secularism has failed to deliver what the Muslim wants, which is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. . . .The only law that the Muslim needs exists already in the Koran and the Hadith.” A state based on the Koran and Hadith could only be called a theocracy

Arrogant Mike said:

“Muslim Hadith Book 019, Number 4366:
It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (May peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.”

I have not checked the veracity of your quote (seen above) and I ask you to do that and not rely on hearsay. It sounds good to the right wing Christians and they will make a capital out of it, and it also appeals to the right wing Muslims as it suits their agenda. But that is not in the spirit of Quraan, Islam and the Prophet.

The authentic Muslim  Ahadith are a lot more than hearsay. Are you claiming to have more respect in the Islamic world than Sahih Muslim? The “spirit” of the Koran, Islam, and your so called prophet fits that hadith perfectly.

Koran verse 005.051
YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

Arrogant Mike said:

If one is allowed to marry a Jewish or Christian woman without asking her to convert, then this Hadith is meaningless and perhaps cooked up by the right wingers.

Right Mike, you continue to blame the right with no proof whatsoever. Guess what your word means nothing here. Yes there is a contradictions, and that is because Mohammad was the greatest IslamoCONMAN of all time, and said whatever he had to at the moment to get his way. In this regard you cannot shine his shoes.

In closing AG said:

I have done my part and it is up to you to research the truth. I have responded to Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, and Naomi… Ali Sina and several others, they don’t read, their purpose is to make money– look at your own site, asking for money, that is your business. I am not looking for any money and just doing my share of the work to build a cohesive America where no one has to live in apprehension of the other.

Please feel free to clarify anything you wish but refrain from anything that you cannot substantiate from Quraan.

Thank you.

I speak the truth about Islam, and back it up with the Islamic scriptures that I have posted. While most of what you responded with was based on your word. Which means absolutely nothing here. If your responses to those anti-Islamic warriors were as long-winded as this one, I do not blame them for not reading it. We do this for the sake of the future generations of America, and the donations help me free up time to continue to expose the interal threat of Islam to America. So save the spin. You do this to try and whitewash Islam. Well you have failed miserable here. Hannity will be the first one who gets this in an email.

Good bye MG!



0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
11 years ago

He could stand on his head and twirl around swearing that islam is beloved and peaceful and means no harm to anyone… Sorry but the koran the book of death and hell says otherwise. the muslims who follow that book of death have done otherwise. They want sharia in our Country here in America.. No Way .. Its the law of death and hell follows it. Get the heck out of our America and take every bit of islam with you. Sharia committed 9/11 and the thousand other atrocities that followed. All over the world islam proves what it is. We dont want it .
And furthermore God the Living God , the God of the Bible, The God of Israel, the God of Salvation does not share his Glory with another. The Bible is the only Holy Book on earth. I will never submit to islam or koran or sharia….


[…] Hannity Guest Mike Ghouse Responds to Logan's Warning with ANOTHER … This entry was posted in Islam and tagged from-waging, his-mother, islam, muslim-hadith, […]

11 years ago

Whah–whoo!!!! A “barn burner”! Good Show!!


[…] States: FOX news and their Dhimmitude strike again. I expected more of Hannity. O’Reilly is a 1st class dhimmi, but I thought […]

11 years ago

Just 2 points that need only a brief answer from Mr. Ghouse…

1) If Muslims venerate the prophets of the Old Testament, especially Moses, are they required to teach their children the Ten Commandments? If not, why not?

2) Does it concern you at all that the Arabic title of Rauf’s book is “A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of Post 9/11 America”? If not, why not?

Truth Detector
11 years ago

Hey, Muslim Boy Mike Ghouse, I have a few questions for you.

If Islam is the religion of peace, why is it that Islam is the only religion that produces Suicide Bomabers?

Why is Islam the only religion that chops off clitorises of little girls? Why don’t you ask the screaming little girls if this brutal, sadistic Muslim act is peaceful? If the God of the Christians endow little girls with clitorises, why does Islam chop them off?

Why is it only Islam that hangs homosexuals and lesbians by the neck until dead, or chops off their necks with a sword? Why does Islam condemn homosexuality here on earth, but Allah rewards them with 28 prepubescent little boy queers in heaven if the homosexusls die in Allah’s cause, mainly if they murder innocent non-Muslims? Why does that make sense?

If Islam is so peaceful, why are Muslims, as I write, murdering each other in Yemen, Irag, Sudan, Libya, Egypt, Afghanistan, and several other Islamic countries?

Do Catholic hunt down and war against Catholics? Hell no!! Do Protestants hunt down and war against Protestants? Hell no!! Do Hindus war against Hindus? Hell no!!! Taoists? Hell no!! Buddhists? Hell no!!! Only Muslims war against their own, i.e., other Muslims. And you’re trying to convince me that Islam is peaceful? Crap. Why don’t you get real, Muslim Boy Mike Ghouse?

Muslim Boy Mike Ghouse, If Islam is so peaceful, why doesn’t it give women and little girls equal rights? Women in the brutal Islam world are relegated to second class, and besides that the Muslim sadists chops off their clitorises. Why is that so peaceful? And the Muslm husbands have the right to beat the delights out of their wives.

If Islam is so peaceful, why are underage little girls forced to marry brutal, sadistic Mulim male sex perverts? Why is it just for these little girls to get raped by depraved, brutal Muslim male sex perverts? And don’t be stupid and tell me that “it’s the custom.” Muslim Boy Mike Ghouse, I already know it’s the custom. It is the custom because Muhammad the Pervert made it the custom. It has always been the custom for depraved Muslim males to rape little girls because they made it the custom. This does not come from the true God, the God of the Christians and Jews. This comes from the Muslim god, Satan, also known as Allah. Why is your allegience to the Muslim god, Satan, also known as Allah?

How can you prove that Islam is the “religion of peace”? Muslim Boy Mike Ghouse, you can’t!!!!!

11 years ago

You cannot reason without forming judgments.
If you form no judgment, then you haven’t thought. About anything.
Again, a Muslim is shown to be lying or creating an uneven field for discusson not just by way of reason, but through the dictates of Islam itself.
Islam exposes and convicts itself.
All Muslim worship and doctrine are profane.

11 years ago
Reply to  eib

Islam, as a culture is two things. Irrational and aggressive. In that sense, it really is like a cancer. This person is trying to control reason, as if reason can be controlled.
The data are in.
Islam is the brutal faith that worships an inhuman god drawn from Arab paganism.
It mocks monotheism, particularly Christianity & Judaism.
Islam mocks these because it bears no relationship to them.
If it did, Muslims would not mock them, if anything, they would be studying the OT and NT with intensity and faith.
They would memorize and sing them as they do the Koran.
Christians sing the psalms.
I have yet to see Islam show such respect.

Roger Anderson
Roger Anderson
11 years ago

“I am willing to discuss this further, if there is intellectual discussion without judgments, if not, don’t expect me to correspond any further.”

It’s interesting to note that Mike Ghouse made this statement immediately after making his own ‘judgments’ on others. Very typical.

I was going to post other quotes but there are far too many that show that he is NOT a Christian. A Christian is one that follows the teachings of Jesus Christ and as he has shown numerous times he recognizes the teachings of the koran and not those of the Bible. He has in fact rejected the teachings of Jesus Christ simply by categorizing Him as just another one of the prophets and speaking of a ‘universal’ theology. It is also notable that when speaking of Muhammad that he capitalizes the word prophet but he didn’t do so when speaking of Jesus or the other prophets.

He is indeed nothing more than an advocate of islam and in no way represents Jesus Christ (Christianity).

Robin Shadowes
Robin Shadowes
11 years ago

What a tool! If the koranimals manages to grab the political power in US, people like MG will be among the first to get their heads chopped off. He better wake up before that happens. Btw, he could start by listening to the video with Anjem Chowderhead laying it all out. Or maybe he is also a pislamophobe?

11 years ago

Ghouse is typical of muslims, the links I provided from youtube videos clear spells out the tactics muslims use to debate “infidels”…(you and I), and frustrate us……problem is, they do so with the misguided notion we are like them…(Stupid), we know their tactics, we know of taqyyia, and if their lips are moving, we know they are lying…..Ghouse…it’s all most over, keep pushing your agenda se what the results are…..


11 years ago

Mr. Ghouse, please respond to this Video?….you wont.


11 years ago

Ghouse, explain this

Guide to Understanding Islam

What does the
Religion of Peace
Teach About…

Lying (Taqiyya and Kitman)

Are Muslims permitted to lie?

Summary Answer:
Muslim scholars teach that Muslims should generally be truthful to each other, unless the purpose of lying is to “smooth over differences.”

There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam – in some cases by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them.

The Qur’an:
Qur’an (16:106) – Establishes that there are circumstances that can “compel” a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur’an (3:28) – This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to “guard themselves.”

Qur’an (9:3) – “…Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters…” The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur’an (40:28) – A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must “hide his faith” among those who are not believers.

Qur’an (2:225) – “Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts” The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur’an (66:2) – “Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths”

Qur’an (3:54) – “And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers.” The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be “compelled” to deceive others for a greater purpose.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:269) – “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.'” The context of this is thought to be the murder of Usayr ibn Zarim and his thirty unarmed men by Muhammad’s men after he “guaranteed” them safe passage (see Additional Notes below).

Bukhari (49:857) – “He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar.” Lying is permitted when the end justifies the means.

Bukhari (84:64-65) – Speaking from a position of power at the time, Ali confirms that lying is permissible in order to deceive an “enemy.”

Muslim (32:6303) – “…he did not hear that exemption was granted in anything what the people speak as lie but in three cases: in battle, for bringing reconciliation amongst persons and the narration of the words of the husband to his wife, and the narration of the words of a wife to her husband (in a twisted form in order to bring reconciliation between them).”

Bukhari (50:369) – Recounts the murder of a poet, Ka’b bin al-Ashraf, at Muhammad’s insistence. The men who volunteered for the assassination used dishonesty to gain Ka’b’s trust, pretending that they had turned against Muhammad. This drew the victim out of his fortress, whereupon he was brutally slaughtered despite putting up a ferocious struggle for his life.

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 – 8.2) – “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory… it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression…

“One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

Additional Notes:

Muslims are allowed to lie to unbelievers in order to defeat them. The two forms are:

Taqiyya – Saying something that isn’t true.

Kitman – Lying by omission. An example would be when Muslim apologists quote only a fragment of verse 5:32 (that if anyone kills “it shall be as if he had killed all mankind”) while neglecting to mention that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of “corruption” and “mischief.”

Though not called Taqiyya by name, Muhammad clearly used deception when he signed a 10-year treaty with the Meccans that allowed him access to their city while he secretly prepared his own forces for a takeover. The unsuspecting residents were conquered in easy fashion after he broke the treaty two years later, and some of the people in the city who had trusted him at his word were executed.

Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka’b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims.

At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad’s “emissaries” went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, belying the probability that they were mostly unarmed, having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981).

Such was the reputation of Muslims for lying and then killing that even those who “accepted Islam” did not feel entirely safe. The fate of the Jadhima is tragic evidence for this. When Muslim “missionaries” approached their tribe one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already “converted” to Islam to avoid just such a demise. However, the others were convinced that they could trust the Muslim leader’s promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were quickly tied up and beheaded – Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837).

Today’s Muslims often try to justify Muhammad’s murder of poets and others who criticized him at Medina by saying that they broke a treaty by their actions. Yet, these same apologists place little value on treaties broken by Muslims. From Muhammad to Saddam Hussein, promises made to non-Muslim are distinctly non-binding in the Muslim mindset.

Leaders in the Arab world routinely say one thing to English-speaking audiences and then something entirely different to their own people in Arabic. Yassir Arafat was famous for telling Western newspapers about his desire for peace with Israel, then turning right around and whipping Palestinians into a hateful and violent frenzy against Jews.

The 9/11 hijackers practiced deception by going into bars and drinking alcohol, thus throwing off potential suspicion that they were fundamentalists plotting jihad. This effort worked so well, in fact, that even weeks after 9/11, John Walsh, the host of a popular American television show, said that their bar trips were evidence of ‘hypocrisy.’

The transmission from Flight 93 records the hijackers telling their doomed passengers that there is “a bomb on board” but that everyone will “be safe” as long as “their demands are met.” Obviously none of these things were true, but these men, who were so intensely devoted to Islam that they were willing to “slay and be slain for the cause of Allah” (as the Qur’an puts it) saw nothing wrong with employing Taqiyya in order to facilitate their mission of mass murder.

The near absence of Qur’anic verse and reliable Hadith that encourage truthfulness is somewhat surprising, given that many Muslims are convinced that their religion teaches honesty. In fact, it is because of this ingrained belief that many Muslims are quite honest. When lying is addressed in the Qur’an, it is nearly always in reference to the “lies against Allah” – referring to the Jews and Christians who rejected Muhammad’s claim to being a prophet.

Finally, the circumstances by which Muhammad allowed a believer to lie to a non-spouse are limited to those that either advance the cause of Islam or enable a Muslim to avoid harm to his well-being (and presumably that of other Muslims as well). Although this should be kept very much in mind when dealing with matters of global security, such as Iran’s nuclear intentions, it is not grounds for assuming that the Muslim one might personally encounter on the street or in the workplace is any less honest than anyone else.

TheReligionofPeace.com Home Page

© 2006 – 2011 TheReligionofPeace.com. All rights reserved.

11 years ago

I am going to address one thing only. Money. “they don’t read, their purpose is to make money- look at your own site, asking for money, that is your business.”
Let me explain something to this fool who is accusing people of getting rich off of exposing muslim liars and jihadis.
When things take over your life. MORE THAN A FULL TIME A JOB– Unless you are independently wealthy, you can’t fund the cause yourself.
When you become a leader in a movement (such as Robert Spencer, Chris Logan, Nonie Darwish,Pam Gellar, etc. people are relying on you for information. Why? Because you can’t get the truth on the news. PEOPLE ARE HAPPY TO PAY FOR THAT. And I am quite offended that this Goosey – Goose would insinuate that Chris or anyone else is using this as means to get rich quick. Trust me– no one is getting rich off this stuff. Nonie Darwish is a friend of mine and I can tell you that she certainly isn’t motivated by that. People have bills and when you give up a regular life to be a warning to the world….and commit 80/90 hours per week to the cause….it’s ok to take donations from people who are not able/willing to search out all this information themselves.
Further, it shouldn’t COST you money — Websites and related items take money. Protests, permits, etc. Money, Money, Money.
Bottom line, just because someone is passionate about something it doesn’t make it wrong to accept donations as a side bar on their website, and it certainly does not mean that they are motivated by money. I am extremely particular about who I donate to as a former corporate fundraiser, I smell fraud a mile away. In fact, since you brought it up, who is paying you goosey? CAIR? Where does CAIR get their money? Funded by donations? How is that any different?? Please answer.
Goosey, you have just inspired me to donate to this cause,so thank you.

11 years ago

Mr. Ghouse,

I am thrilled you decided to respond Christopher Logan. Your response gives me the opportunity to respond to you, something I have long hoped for. I maintain you and Dr Zuhdi Jasser are two of the most dangerous people in the world at this time. As a Preacher, and a Born again Christian, its not my place or my intention to judge your or Dr. Jasser’s motives. I suspect both of you have good intentions. It is my place, my duty, to warn of false teachings and heresy.

The danger presented by you and Dr Jasser is not from suicide bombers or jets being flown into buildings. It comes from practicing and Preaching a form of Islam that is NOT factually based on the Qur’an or the aHadith and certainly not on Sharia. You lull people who want to believe that Islam is a “Religion of Peace” into the myth that it is. You sir take the danger even further by Preaching your all inclusive pluralism. There is NO Biblical justification for pluralism. There is ONLY one God, and He is not Allah, nor Buddha, nor anyone else in your Pluralistic Society.

Before going into our Theological differences, a couple of observations. I thought this part of your reply to Mr. Logan was pretty comical. “I have done my part and it is up to you to research the truth. I have responded to Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, and Naomi… Ali Sina and several others, they don’t read, their purpose is to make money- look at your own site, asking for money, that is your business. I am not looking for any money and just doing my share of the work to build a cohesive America where no one has to live in apprehension of the other.” Your implication that Mr. Logans purpose, along with these others is to make money is funny considering all over your websites you are called a “Professional Speaker”. Do you travel around speaking for free? Do you intend to give the two books you are writing or sell them? People who live in glass house shouldn’t throw stones.

You also write:

Robert Spencer, Geert Wilders, Brigitte Gabriel, Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, Alan Dershowitz, Ali Sina and a host of others are guided by those translations and it suits them to sell hate and frightened nincompoops write those checks.

I wonder Mr. Ghouse just how many “ frightened nincompoops write those checks” to you? People so frightened of Radical Islam that out of hope and fear they buy into your liberal interpretation of Islam and the Qur’an. People who out of fear so want to believe there is a liberal or moderate Islam out there that will rise against the more Devout Muslims.

The next thing is all of your talk of humility, both in your response to Mr. Logan, and on your websites, yet all over your websites are listed your accomplishments. Your websites have your pictures proclaiming you as a professional speaker all over them. Places you have spoken … all the “good works” you feel you have done. Your talk of humility reeks of hypocrisy.

On to the Theology!

You write :

In the context of an ordinance enjoining war against them. this “something” can mean only one thing-namely, unprovoked aggression: for it is this that has been forbidden by God through all the apostles who were entrusted with conveying His message to man. Thus, the above verse must be understood as a call to the believers to fight against such-and only such-of the nominal followers of earlier revelation as deny their own professed beliefs by committing aggression against the followers of the Qur’an (cf. Manar X, 338).(Quran Ref: 9:29 )
[42] See in this connection the statement (in 5:13-14) that the Jews and the Christians “have forgotten much of what they had been told to bear in mind”. (Quran Ref: 9:29).

Why did you stop at 5:13-14? Are you not using that Quranic text out of context without including verses 15-17?

15. O people of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that ye used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary). There hath come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book,-
16. Wherewith Allah guideth all who seek His good pleasure to ways of peace and safety, and leadeth them out of darkness, by His will, unto the light,- guideth them to a path that is straight.
17. In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: “Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every – one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things.”

Now lets go on to 9:29 you reference:

29. Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
30. The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah.s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
31. They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah. there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).
32. Fain would they extinguish Allah.s light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).
33. It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).

In reading these verses in their entirety, not taking them out of context, it is plain to see that as a Born Again Christian who believes in Jesus Christ, as my Lord and Savior, not a prophet, I am guilty of blasphemy according to the Qur’an. You and I both are very aware of the punishment for blasphemy according to Sharia Law. I tell you Mr. Ghouse the same thing I tell Christian Pastors about The Holy Bible. It is what it is. It is the perfect infalliable Word of God. You take it whole, either you Believe it is The Word of God or you don’t. As a Muslim you are supposed to feel the same about the Qur’an. You don’t gloss over or “cherry pick” it to make your point. You sir, try to make your point of Islam being a Religion of Peace, by perverting the Qur’an. You sir, in trying to make your “perfect utopian pluralistic society” pervert The Holy Bible. You sir, commit blasphemy to both Religions.

The big difference, as a Christian I Pray for you. I Pray God will remove the scales from your eye’s and help you to see the truth. I Pray for God to forgive you. For the time being your Devout Muslim Brothers tolerate your blasphemy because you are a tool for them. No more, no less. The day you stop being useful to them they will turn on you for your blasphemy.

You write:

Since Jesus is the promised Messiah predicted in Islam, the right wing Christian assumes that Jesus is a Muslim (p0litical) and will destroy them, as the Logan website writes it up. Likewise the right wing Muslim believes that when Jesus takes out the evil, he took out Christianity. How ignorant are some of these folks.

Excuse me?!?!?! I know absolutely NO Christian who assumes Jesus is a Muslim!! I know of no true Christian who knows anything about Islam, that believes Jesus of The Holy Bible is Jesus of the Qur’an. For a Christian to believe that would be blasphemy. When people such as yourself start Preaching your pluralistic society nonsense you aren’t just endangering peoples lives Mr. Ghouse, you are endangering something much more valuable, their souls. The Bible warns over and over of people like you.

1 John 2:17-19
King James Version (KJV)
And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

1 John 2:21-23
King James Version (KJV)
I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

1 John 4:2-4
King James Version (KJV)
Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

2 John 1-11
King James Version (KJV)
The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth; For the truth’s sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever. Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love. I rejoiced greatly that I found of thy children walking in truth, as we have received a commandment from the Father. And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another. And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

All of the Scriptures above as well as many, many more I can quote shoot holes all through your claims of Pluralism. What angers me however, is your claim that my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is merely a Prophet. That you and your Muslim Brothers try to put him in the same category as Mohammed. As a Muslim you say He wasn’t hung on a tree, He didn’t die on that Cross to pay our sin debt, and was not resurrected! How dare you!

Mr. Ghouse, for the sake of your soul I implore you to read those verses above. Pay very, very close attention to the last 2 verses Mr. Ghouse. For the sake of the people who follow your false teachings I challenge you. Do the same thing Dr. Mark Gabriel did. Study The Holy Bible, try to prove it wrong. Do it honestly and with an open heart. Read Dr. Gabriel’s books. Fact check The Holy Bible against science. The earliest copy of The New Testament found so far dates back to 125 A.D. There are more than 24,000 of the Ancient manuscripts. They all say the same thing. With all of the massive manuscript evidence you would think there would be massive discrepancies – just the opposite is true. New Testament manuscripts agree in 99.5% of the text. Most of the discrepancies are in spelling and word order. A few words have been changed or added. The Holy Spirit made sure we would have an accurate copy of God’s word so we would not be deceived. The Mormons, theological liberals as well as other cults and false religions such as Islam that claim the Bible has been tampered with are completely proven false by the extensive, historical manuscript evidence. Most Muslim Apologists I have debated say the Bible was corrupted in 300 A.D., science disproves this.

I challenge you Mr. Ghouse. Study The Bible. Study the science. You have been and will remain in my Prayers.

Dan Cox

11 years ago
Reply to  Dan

An excellent reply and analysis DC!!!

11 years ago
Reply to  desertscout

Thank you DS!! Sorry I got so long winded, its just a subject I’m very passionate about!

11 years ago
Reply to  admin

Excellent reply to an uninformed and foolish man…keep up the great work all!

11 years ago
Reply to  Dan

Definitely a keeper.
Theology and history are extraordinarily fascinating, and to learn and use them well is a skill with which you and others can be quite happy.
Be joyful with your learning– then you will not be boastful, but grateful.

11 years ago

Speaking specifically of the Ayt al-Sayf (Sword Verse, Koran 9:5) and its call to wage warfare against all non-Moslems, Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti, a contemporary Al-Azhar University scholar, wrote that:

“the verse (9:5) does not leave any room in the mind to conjecture about what is called defensive war. This verse asserts that holy war, which is demanded in Islamic law, is not a defensive war because it could legitimately be an offensive war. That is the apex and most honorable of all holy wars. Its goal is the exaltation of the word of God, the construction of Islamic society, and the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth regardless of the means. It is legal to carry on an offensive holy war.”

(from: Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography, Damascus: Dar al-Fikr, 2001, pp 323-4)


In Islam, disbelief in ‘allah’ and its ‘messenger’ is the worst crime of all and this, therefore, is the license for Moslems to kill non-Moslems for refusing to accept Islam. There is essentially no difference between an ‘offensive’ and a ‘defensive’ war to a Moslem because all ‘disbelief’ is itself warfare against ‘allah’ and Mahomet.

11 years ago
Reply to  visitor

Excellent point!

11 years ago

Mike Ghouse has embraced four seemingly reliable rules-of-thumb about religion. (By the way, I am being generous with Mike in assuming that he actually developed his own response to you. He may very well have used the help of someone else more sinister.) Anyway, his rules-of-thumb seem to be: 1) All religions worship God. 2) Truly religious people are benevolent. 3) People who don’t believe in God are the ones who deserve our opprobrium. 4) If religion A honors the same prophets and texts as religion B, then they share fundamentally common values.

If understanding theology were as simple as understanding automobiles, Mike would be on the right track. Think of the hybrid “Rolls Wagon” with a RR hood and a VW chassis. It’s easy to spot a counterfeit car, but someone who has never seen a genuine Rolls Royce or a genuine Volkswagen might easily be fooled. Because Mr. Ghouse glosses over essential elements of both the Judeo-Christian faiths and Islam, he sees them all as having much in common. Perhaps he trusts that the marketplace will protect innocent people from counterfeit religions, just as people hope the government will protect consumers from bogus bills and Ponzi schemes. But that is a naive hope.

That is why the Bible repeatedly warns against false prophets who use the name of God for evil purposes. The third of the Mosaic Ten Commandments says, “Do not use my name for evil purposes.” (Yes, most people think that commandment is about swearing, but it is much broader than that.) The Prophet Jeremiah warned the people about false prophets: “I am against the prophets who tell their dreams that are full of lies. They tell these dreams and lead my people astray with their lies and their boasting.” (Jeremiah 23:32) Jesus warned against false prophets: “Be on your guard against false prophets; they come to you looking like sheep on the outside, but on the inside they are really like wild wolves. You will know them by what they do. . . A healthy tree bears good fruit, but a poor tree bears bad fruit.” (Matthew 7:15-17) St. Peter, the founder of the Christian Church, warned against false prophets: “False prophets appeared in the past among the people, and in the same way false teachers will appear among you. They will bring in destructive, untrue doctrines, and will deny the Master who redeemed them, and so they will bring upon themselves sudden destruction.” (2 Peter 2:1)

P. Newton, in his booklet, “Allah, Is He God?,” (see http://answering-islam.org/Authors/Newton/allah.html ) writes, “When comparing two bank notes for the purpose of determining which is the counterfeit and which is the genuine – we must not concentrate on the similarities. For we will find that the two notes will almost look the same. But we must concentrate on the differences. . . The work of a counterfeiter is the work that contains only the parts that are easy to copy. The love of God for the sinner and the ungodly is totally missing from the Quran because it is the difficult, even the impossible thing to copy. [ Allah is a man-made god – a counterfeit. ] We must be sure as we bend our knees to worship, that we worship the true God. For to worship a manmade idea about God is the ultimate form of straying indeed. It is more deadly than worshipping an idol made of silver or gold. For an idol is shown to be an idol, but a man’s idea dressed up like God, with titles such as ‘the Creator,’ ‘the Merciful,’ yet without the reality of what God truly is, is diabolical indeed.”

Rebecca Bynum, in her book, “Allah is Dead – Why Islam is Not a Religion,” writes, “Real peacemaking is the result of the stout and unyielding defense of the values our civilization was founded upon. . . . [T]he truth is, Islam is deeply and profoundly wrong. Pretending it is right only worsens our situation by delaying actions that must be taken if our own civilization, however imperfect and unseemly it may be, is to be preserved.” (pg. 61)

Back to Mike Ghouse’s rules-of-thumb: 1) Both true and false religions claim to worship God the Creator, but the superficial trappings of religion do not a religion make. 2) Truly religious people reflect the values and ideals of their faith – which can be either good or evil. (Remember Jim Jones of the People’s Temple and David Koresh of the Branch Davidians.) 3) People who don’t believe in a particular false god or evil ideology are showing genuine discernment. People who gobble poison thinking it is food are the fools. 4) Since each of us first heard the story of “Little Red Riding-hood” we have been warned about wolves hiding in sheep’s clothing. Nevertheless, people like Mike Grouse continue to let themselves be duped.

11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

Quote: 1) All religions worship God. 2) Truly religious people are benevolent. 3) People who don’t believe in God are the ones who deserve our opprobrium. 4) If religion A honors the same prophets and texts as religion B, then they share fundamentally common values.

This is the PC MC creed.
Political Correctness, Multiculturalism, that is.
He is trying to make you believe that there is unity in diversity.
Not true.
The only thing existing in diversity is diversity itself.
Unity is the enemy of diversity, unity in multicultural ideology (cultural Marxism) will destroy diversity.
And if diversity is destroyed, then there is no more civilization, there are no more variant points of view, there is no reason.
In other words, the world becomes Islam.
This struggle mirrors the Cold War extremely closely, except for the mobilization of peoples in it will have to take place from the bottom up instead of the top down.
The only protection diversity has, is the fact of its existence.
Don’t let the culture of massive conformity win. If you must conform, do so toward Western values, texts and civilization.

11 years ago
Reply to  Chris

2) Truly religious people reflect the values and ideals of their faith – which can be either good or evil.

Our historical experience with religion in the West has opened our eyes to the truth about religion and religious people.
We understand that it is the tool of propitiation or salvation. We also understand that horrible things have been and are being done in the name of gods, doctrines and zealotry.
We know that we must suspect and eventually dismiss zealotry and irrational, fanatical faith.
If you think that a God-fearing person is invariably law-abiding and peaceful, look up Carrie Nation or better yet, John Brown.
Do some research on Scott Roeder.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The road to heaven is paved with lost opportunities.
And the intentions you follow up and the opportunities you miss are completely your responsibility– in the West, we have made sure of that!

11 years ago

One thing about Ghouse’s reply is heartening, at least: it shows that Muslim apologists are not even bothering to try to refine their tactics at this late stage of the game with even an attempt at more sophisticated sophistry — which bodes well for the prospect that sooner, rather than later, the bottom will fall out of their bargain-basement Potemkin village they are trying (and still, unfortunately, successfully so) to sell the West.

Of course, this is no surprise: Muslim apologists, no matter how clever they think they are (think Reza Aslan in particular), have little substance to work with. The putative virtues of Islam are so thin, they can only be stretched so far before the propagandist is forced to tap-dance without any props on a stage before a half-empty bored and hostile audience.

And that isn’t counting the mountains of skeletons that have to be hastily covered up during any of these “dialogues”, as the apologist keeps talking and hoping his audience won’t notice the bones and skulls protruding from his shoddy cover-up.

Given the holes with which Islam is riddled, and given the sheer mass of grotesque evil that constitutes the bulk of its culture and history, one can only conclude that Muslims haven’t been run out of town decades ago because of ONE REASON — and one reason alone: the majority of Westerners are PC MC (which is a strange form of intelligent stupidity).

New Crusader
New Crusader
11 years ago
Reply to  Hesperado

I object to the use of the word intelligent in your last sentence.

11 years ago
Reply to  New Crusader

Well, I’ve thought long and hard about this strange phenomenon of PC MC, and while I used to just reflexively call them “stupid”, I’ve noticed over time too many of them are in fact intelligent to various degrees.

Our problem would be much simpler to solve, if the Western enablers among us were:

1) only Leftists

2) only Elites

3) only stupid.

But I’ve come to realize the problem is much broader than this, and I’ve seen too many so-called “Conservatives” anxiously distinguish “extremist Islamism” from Islam (and even praising the latter, as for example Mitt Romney has done). And I’ve run across too many scholars of history and anthropology who obviously are not stupid, yet are infected by the mindset of multiculturalism.

This has led me to conclude that the mental disease of PC MC is more complicated than mere stupidity: it’s a paradoxical phenomenon — intelligent stupidity. A stupidity with a complex structure of interlocking parts.

11 years ago
Reply to  Hesperado

I may have to borrow this sometime, especially the last paragraph!

New Crusader
New Crusader
11 years ago
Reply to  Hesperado

“And I’ve run across too many scholars of history and anthropology who obviously are not stupid, yet are infected by the mindset of multiculturalism.”

Yes, many are teaching in universities, members of think thanks, etc. Most of their arguments seem to be built on a series of inbred presuppositions, speculation, and pet theories they will not let go of. They have to push it through everything they say and do. Like a rocket that skews off course and can not correct it’s self, but must be destroyed before it creates damage. Some of these people seem to do likewise. Others are prevented by various constraints to counter them before damage is done.

11 years ago

Thanks for standing up against Islam Logan. Islam is not, was not and never will be a religion, no matter what bull they spew. Most Americans have researched what they call ‘a peaceful religion’ by reading their own words. There is a movement spreading across America called ‘LOCK & LOAD’, which is more then prepared for these terrorists. They may have easily taken over other countries with their lies and brutality but they were sadly mistaken when they put us in their sights. Clearly they know nothing of our country and the battles we have fought and won for our freedoms. I suggest they brush up on American History then high tail it right back to the middle east where they can continue with their primeval practices.
Again Logan, thanks for exposing this farce.



[…] Mike is a so called “moderate” Muslim who made the mistake of responding to one of my emails. His attempted Islamocon was easily refuted, and he ran for the door. The link to this debate was also sent to Hannity. Of course he ignorned […]

9 years ago


9 years ago


9 years ago


9 years ago



[…] Muslim propagandists. Today I will expose the perpetrators of world’s latest and greatest Islamocon. The […]