There is still debate about the use of the words “Islamic Fascists” or “Islamofascism” and whether the term is “correct”. I think it is perfect. After all, these fanatical, murdering thugs want to kill us and impose their own state imposed religion on the survivors, or “dhimmis”. Here is a reading list with that in mind. If you are new to this you will be amazed, as I was. It is imperative that as many people as possible see this information. Feel free to reference any material, it is all available online. Updated whenever it becomes necessary.
An article about Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who had ties to the 20th century Nazis and helped them in their efforts to extirminate the Jewish race.
A series of articles in Frontpagemag by Andrew Bostom that illuminates the historical context and foundations of islamofascism. The third article contains imformation about al-Husayni. Just a sample:
…Invoking the personal support of such prominent Nazis as Himmler and Eichmann, the Mufti’s relentless hectoring of German, Rumanian, and Hungarian government officials caused the cancellation of an estimated 480,000 exit visas which had been granted to Jews (80,000 from Rumania, and 400,000 from Hungary). As a result, these hapless individuals were deported to Polish concentration camps. A United Nations Assembly document presented in 1947 which contained the Mufti’s June 28, 1943 letter to the Hungarian Foreign Minister requesting the deportation of Hungarian Jews to Poland, includes this stark, telling annotation: “As a Sequel to This Request 400,000 Jews Were Subsequently Killed”…Yasser Arafat, beginning at the age of 16, worked for the Mufti performing terrorist operations. Arafat always characterized the Mufti as his primary spiritual and political mentor…..
Ibn Warraq on How to Debate a Muslim, a series of responses to some of the common assertions made by Islamic apologists…a refreshing and enlightening antidote to the usual dhimmitude we get from non-Muslim academics who engage Islam.(Robert Spencer)
Islamic Apostates’ Tales, by Andrew Bostom; A review of “Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out”, edited by Ibn Warraq.
“The very notion of apostasy has vanished from the West, where one talks of being a ‘lapsed Catholic’ or ‘nonpracticing Christian’ rather than an ‘apostate.’…Apostasy is still punishable by long prison sentences and even death in many Islamic countries such as Pakistan and Iran, and as many of our authors have relatives in those countries, whom they regularly visit, it is common sense and simple prudence not to use their real names. “…Azam Kamguian notes that the Koran (in section IV.34) encourages husbands to admonish their wives, then leave them, and finally to physically beat them. She further describes the brutal “sexual apartheid” Iranian women suffer under when subjected to Shari’a law:…She also points out the role of left-wing multiculturalists in enabling this anti-woman agenda, which subjected many (including the author herself) to imprisonment and torture
Updated: More References
The Truth about Islamic Crusades and Imperialism, by James Arlandson.
Historical facts say that Islam, including Muhammad, launched their own Crusades against Christianity long before the European Crusades.
Westerners—even academics—accept the notion that the West alone was aggressive. It seems that Islam is always innocent and passive. It is difficult to uncover the source of this Western self—loathing. It is, however, a pathology that seems to strike Westerners more than other people around the globe. This anti—West pathology shows up in Westerners’ hatred for the European Crusades in the Medieval Age
Muslims seem to forget that they had their own, for several centuries before the Europeans launched theirs as a defense against the Islamic expansion.
Ten reasons why sharia is bad for all societies, By James Arlandson.
What are some of the legalized rules of jihad found in the Quran, hadith, and classical legal opinions?
(1) Women and children are enslaved. They can either be sold, or the Muslims may ‘marry’ the women, since their marriages are automatically annulled upon their capture. (2) Jihadists may have sex with slave women. Ali, Muhammad’s cousin and son—in—law, did this. (3) Women and children must not be killed during war, unless this happens in a nighttime raid when visibility was low. (4) Old men and monks could be killed. (5) A captured enemy of war could be killed, enslaved, ransomed for money or an exchange, freely released, or beaten. One time Muhammad even tortured a citizen of the city of Khaybar in order to extract information about where the wealth of the city was hidden. (6) Enemy men who converted could keep their property and small children. This law is so excessive that it amounts to forced conversion. Only the strongest of the strong could resist this coercion and remain a non—Muslim. (7) Civilian property may be confiscated. (8) Civilian homes may be destroyed. (9) Civilian fruit trees may be destroyed. (10) Pagan Arabs had to convert or die. This does not allow for the freedom of religion or conscience. (11) People of the Book (Jews and Christians) had three options (Sura 9:29): fight and die; convert and pay a forced ‘charity’ or zakat tax; or keep their Biblical faith and pay a jizya or poll tax. The last two options mean that money flows into the Islamic treasury, so why would Muhammad receive a revelation to dry up this money flow?
Martyrdom? What a bargain! By James Arlandson
In his Fatwa declaring war on the US (1996), bin Laden quotes a hadith passage (Muhammad’s words and deeds outside of the Quran) that has the prophet describing heaven for the martyrs fallen in a holy war. The first moment blood gushes, they are guaranteed Islamic heaven. They receive crowns, jewels, and seventy—two dark—eyed houris or beautiful maidens, for each martyr.
[A] martyr’s privileges are guaranteed by Allah; forgiveness with the first gush of his blood, he will be shown his seat in paradise, he will be decorated with the jewels of belief, married off to the beautiful ones, protected from the test in the grave, assured security in the day of judgment, crowned with the crown of dignity, a ruby of which is better than this whole world and its entire content, wedded to seventy—two of the pure Houris (beautiful women of Paradise) and his intercession on the behalf of seventy of his relatives will be accepted.
In 633 A.D., a year after the Prophet’s death, the general of the newly formed Muslim armies wrote a letter to the Persian emperor. “Submit to our authority,” he declared, “and we shall leave you and your land and go against others. If not, you will be conquered against your will by men who love death as you love life.”
The general was Khalid ibn al-Walid, who had once opposed Muhammad but who upon becoming a Muslim tumbled dynasties with the convert’s fiery zeal. To the emperor the letter must have seemed the ravings of a lunatic. How could the Persian Empire, which had stood for more than 400 years, be threatened by such upstarts as the Arabs, whom Persians with sophisticated disdain considered mere “lizard eaters”?
Earlier this month–nearly 1,400 years later–Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a spokesman for Osama bin Laden, held a news conference in which he threatened the West and Americans in particular by claiming that there were “thousands of young men” eager to become martyrs, who “loved death as you love life.”
The allusion was no coincidence. Without doubt, the spokesman had the words of Khalid ibn al-Walid echoing in his memory. For Muslims of the extremist persuasion of Osama bin Laden and his Taliban protectors, Islam is engaged in a primordial combat with a malignant enemy, an enemy who differs little from early adversaries of the Prophet himself.
The Jews should own the ‘Kingdom of Heaven’, By James Arlandson
…neither the Muslims nor the Christians should have fought over Jerusalem. The city historically and originally belonged to the Jews; they owned it for a thousand years before Christ came and for 1600 years before Muhammad came (and when they were exiled, many came back). So it belongs to them today. It is simply a myth to assume that Muslims or Christians won Jerusalem by some kind of divine right or by an unchallenged assumption that says, ‘of course they own the region.’
Slave-Girls as sexual property in the Quran, By James Arlandson
The Quran makes women subordinate to men in many ways. But no women subject to the rule of Quranic law are more unfortunate than slave girls. According to the eternal and unchanging scripture of Islam, men are permitted to treat them as sexual property regardless of their wishes, under certain specified circumstances.
It is one thing for some soldiers in any army to strike out on their own and rape women. All armies have criminal soldiers who commit this wrong act. But it is quite another to codify rape in a sacred text. Islam codifies and legalizes rape. It is disappointing that the Quran does not abolish this sexual crime in the clearest terms: Thou shalt not have sex with slave—girls under any circumstance!
The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism, by Andrew Bostom
This comprehensive, meticulously documented collection of scholarly articles presents indisputable evidence that a readily discernible, uniquely Islamic antisemitism—a specific Muslim hatred of Jews—has been expressed continuously since the advent of Islam. Debunking the conventional wisdom, which continues to assert that Muslim animosity toward Jews is entirely a 20th-century phenomenon fueled mainly by the protracted Arab-Israeli conflict, leading scholars provide example after example of antisemitic motifs in Muslim documents reaching back to the beginnings of Islam. The contributors show that the Koran itself is a significant source of hostility toward Jews, as well as other foundational Muslim texts including the hadith (the words and deeds of Muhammad as recorded by pious Muslim transmitters) and the sira (the earliest Muslim biographies of Muhammad). Many other examples are adduced in the writings of influential Muslim jurists, theologians, and scholars, from the Middle Ages through the contemporary era.
The Legacy of Jihad in Historical Palestine (Part I) , By Andrew G. Bostom
Violent jihad warfare on infidels is the norm, not the exception, in Islamic history. Once successful, jihad leads to the imposition of humiliating, degrading, violent, and expensive oppression under dhimmitude, the institutionalized imposition of lowly status upon those who refuse to abandon their faith and adopt Islam. Among the worst victims of jihad and dhimmitude have been the Jews and Christians who lived in historic Palestine…
Arab Muslim invaders engaged, additionally, in continuous jihad raids that ravaged and enslaved Sub—Saharan African animist populations, extending to the southern Sudan. When the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a millennium of jihad had transpired. These tremendous military successes spawned a triumphalist jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of infidels slaughtered, or enslaved and deported, the cities and villages which were pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized. Christian (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav, etc.), as well as Hebrew sources, and even the scant Hindu and Buddhist writings which survived the ravages of the Muslim conquests, independently validate this narrative, and ,complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering of the non—Muslim victims of jihad wars.
The Legacy of Jihad in Historical Palestine (Part II) , By Andrew G. Bostom
Hajj Amin el—Husseini was appointed Mufti of Jerusalem by the British High Commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life. Throughout his public career, the Mufti relied upon traditional Qur’anic anti—Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews”, not merely Zionists…the Mufti spent the remainder of World War II in Germany and Italy. From this sanctuary, he provided active support for the Germans by recruiting Bosnian Muslims, in addition to Muslim minorities from the Caucasus, for dedicated Nazi SS units.  The Mufti’s objectives for these recruits—and Muslims in general—were made explicit during his multiple wartime radio broadcasts from Berlin, heard throughout the Arab world: an international campaign of genocide against the Jews. For example, during his March 1, 1944 broadcast he stated:
Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. 
Invoking the personal support of such prominent Nazis as Himmler and Eichmann,  the Mufti’s relentless hectoring of German, Rumanian, and Hungarian government officials caused the cancellation of an estimated 480,000 exit visas which had been granted to Jews (80,000 from Rumania, and 400,000 from Hungary). As a result, these hapless individuals were deported to Nazi concentration camps in Poland.
Jihad begot the Crusades (1) , By Andrew G. Bostom
By the time of the classical Muslim historian al—Tabari’s death in 923, jihad wars had expanded the Muslim empire from Portugal to the Indian subcontinent. Subsequent Muslim conquests continued in Asia, as well as on Christian eastern European lands. The Christian kingdoms of Armenia, Byzantium, Bulgaria, Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, and Albania, in addition to parts of Poland and Hungary, were also conquered and Islamized. When the Muslim armies were stopped at the gates of Vienna in 1683, over a millennium of jihad had transpired.  These tremendous military successes spawned a triumphalist jihad literature. Muslim historians recorded in detail the number of infidels slain or enslaved, the cities and villages which were pillaged, and the lands, treasure, and movable goods seized. Christian (Coptic, Armenian, Jacobite, Greek, Slav, etc.), as well as Hebrew sources, and even the scant Hindu and Buddhist writings which survived the ravages of the Muslim conquests, independently validate this narrative, and complement the Muslim perspective by providing testimonies of the suffering of the non—Muslim victims of jihad wars.
Jihad begot the Crusades (2) , By Andrew G. Bostom
Moshe Gil, in his seminal analysis A History of Palestine, 634—1099,� emphasizes the singular centrality that Palestine occupied in the mind of its pre—Islamic Jewish inhabitants, who referred to the land as ‘al—Sham.’ Indeed, as Gil observes, the sizable Jewish population in Palestine (who formed a majority of its inhabitants, when grouped with the Samaritans) at the dawn of the Arab Muslim conquest were ‘…the direct descendants of the generations of Jews who had lived there since the days of Joshua bin Nun, in other words for some 2000 years…’.  He also explodes the ahistorical thesis of scholars who, 
…perceive an ethnic motivation behind the [jihad] conquests.� They see Arabs everywhere: even the Canaanites and the Philistines were Arabs, according to their theories.� This applies to an even greater degree to the population of Palestine and Syria in the seventh century, who were certainly Semites.� Thus, according to their claims, the conquering Arab forces in the course of their battles, actually encountered their own people or at least members of their own race who spoke the same language…This is of course a very distorted view: Semitism is not a race and only relates to a sphere of language.� The populations met along the route of battle, living in cities or the country side, were not Arabs and did not speak Arabic.� We do know of Bedouin tribes at that time who inhabited the borderlands and the southern desert of Palestine, west of the Euphrates (Hira) in the Syrian desert, Palmyra, and elsewhere.� But the cultivated inner regions and the cities were inhabited by Jews and Christians who spoke Aramaic.� They did not sense any special ties to the Bedouin; if anything it was the contrary.� Their proximity and the danger of an invasion from that quarter disturbed their peace of mind and this is amply reflected both in the writings of the Church Fathers and in Talmudic sources.
Gil concludes that views of the jihad conquest of Palestine expressed in the sources from the vanquished, indigenous non—Muslim populations, 
…reflect the attitude of the towns and villages in Palestine quite accurately; the attitude of a sedentary population, of farmers and craftsmen, toward nomads whose source of income is the camel and who frequently attack the towns, pillage and slaughter the inhabitants, and endanger the lives of the wayfarer.� These sources completely contradict the argument…to the effect that the villagers and townsmen in Palestine accepted the invasion of those tribes bearing the banner of Islam with open arms of their so—called racial affinity.