The Pickering Post
Tuesday, 11th December 2018

If you would like to be involved or support the upkeep and further development of this site, it would be very welcome no matter how small.


... but can you take Mohammed out of Islam?

Harry Richardson

Harry Richardson is a long-time student of Islam and author of best seller, "the Story Of Mohammed - Islam Unveiled',


I was asked recently whether any Islamic religious experts had tried to refute the claims in my book. Funnily enough, when I thought about it, there hasn’t been a single one. Considering how touchy they are about their religion you might think they would have something to say about such a high profile Amazon best seller.

My fiercest critics have always been Western academics and intellectuals. They get really ticked off about me and my views and are quite personal with their accusations. “This man is no scholar!” they roar. “This book doesn’t follow our conventions!” they scream.

And fair enough too. I am no scholar and don’t follow all of their conventions. I think that is a major reason why the book has been so popular.

Their conventions insist that any criticism of non-Western cultures (and especially Islam) must be “balanced” by showing a good side. If there isn’t a good side you have to invent one (or find something nice which is irrelevant and pretend that it isn’t).

While they resent me for writing this book, I resented them for not writing it. When I started ten years ago there wasn’t an academic in sight. All they could do was sing the praises of Islam. It was one of the “Great Abrahamic faiths” which had “given so much to the world.”

Anyone who dared to question this fantasy was torn to pieces with accusations of racism, ignorance and xenophobia.

Finally however, things are starting to change. Some academics are actually starting to admit that there may be some problems with Islam (no s#*t Sherlock!). They are now combining their collective wisdom and starting to come up with solutions to “the problem”.

Sam Harris is “an atheist, author and neuroscientist,” and Maajid Nawaz is a former Islamist member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir. Together, they have co-written a book called Islam and the Future of Tolerance: a Dialogue. News Limited recently published an article by this duo.

In it they argue for the need to “modernise” Islam by taking out the nasty bits. They reason that by doing so, “bad” Muslims won’t be able to use those evil bits to impose a version of violent Islam on the peaceful majority.

In short, this American scholar and his Islamic apostate (former Muslim) friend want to create a completely new version of Islam.

After embracing this new “nice” version of Islam, hardcore Jihadists and pious Muslims would abandon the authentic 1400 year-old Islam of their beloved prophet and open a florist shop in Soho or something (they were a bit light on details here).

“We have a task ahead of us” said Mr Harris with breathtaking understatement, “And that is to begin the process of adapting, reinterpreting our scriptures (whose scriptures?) for the modern day and age.”

I was reminded, for some reason, of a scene in the TV series “Red Dwarf”. The space ship comes under attack from a battle cruiser. The ship is being rocked by explosions and laser cannon.

“Quick!” shouts Cat, “Activate the deflector shields”. “A brilliant plan sir, if I may say so” says Kryten, the rather deadpan robot, “With just one small flaw; we don’t have any deflector shields!”

There are a number of small flaws in this plan to reform Islam. For the sake of brevity, I’ll just outline a few of the more catastrophic.

Let’s start with the idea of altering the Koran. It is believed by Muslims that a copy of the Koran resides on a table in Heaven.

This copy of the Koran is known as “The Mother of the Book.” All Korans on Earth are carbon copies of this heavenly blueprint.

Because of this, not one single word may be changed. To do so would render it incompatible with the original.

Several chapters of the Koran start with three Arabic letters and no one has the foggiest clue why. The official Koran of Saudi Arabia simply states that “only Allah knows.”

The current version of the Koran was assembled by Zaid, the private secretary of the third Caliph Omar. How he knew the exact contents of “The Mother of the Book” remains a mystery.

According to the legend however, he then burned all other versions of the Koran and no one complained about it. This is hardly surprising given the temperament of his boss, Omar.

Omar was a man for whom tough love meant beating his own son to death for drunkenness. General consensus suggests that the Koran has been pretty much in its current form from that time to this.

Today, the idea of changing the Koran would be considered heresy by most Muslims. Under Sharia Law, heresy carries a suspended sentence. If they can’t find anything to suspend you from however, they will usually saw your head off and spit down your neck.

To change the Koran today, I believe we would need to do pretty much what Omar did. In other words, we would need to burn every current copy of the Koran and delete every electronic copy.

Then we would need to track down the millions of Muslims who have learned to recite all of (or even part of) the Koran and assemble them in a secure facility somewhere.

After that, we just invent one of those memory erasers from the movie Men in Black and bingo! Problem solved.

How do you think that idea would go down in the Islamic world? Like a hot dog stand at the Kaaba I would imagine.

But let’s assume we can persuade the entire Muslim world to agree peaceably to this outrage and move on to the next part of the scheme.

Mr Harris complains that Mohammed is venerated by Muslims. This is despite the fact that he was a warlord, similar to the people running the Islamic State.

He then goes on to say, “That’s a very inconvenient fact that we have to confront head on and find some way to disavow.”

It’s great to see that someone in the establishment finally seems ready to admit that this is a fact. Now they think that they just need to find a way to disavow it.

Fortunately, academics and leftists have had plenty of practice at disavowing facts lately; certainly when it comes to the facts about Islam. They have also had great success in their efforts to re-write or re-interpret Western history.

It may come as a shock to them therefore, to find that Muslims are rather less receptive to the idea of having their own history re-written.

I suspect that simply labelling critics as ‘ignorant racists’ or ‘dangerous right wing fanatics' won’t be quite as effective with Muslims as it has been with Western audiences.

This is likely to be a source of considerable disappointment to left leaning academics. I’m sure they feel that the Jihadists owe them big time.

Academics have after all, been incredibly supportive of the Jihadists. They have assisted with dismantling our borders and freedom of speech; not to mention mass immigration, mosque construction and genocide of the Jews etc. Surely re-writing the Islamic scriptures is the least the Jihadists could do to repay them.

Something tells me that these left leaning academics are about to embark on a steep learning curve regarding the Islamic concept of gratitude to infidels.

The whole idea of taking Mohammed out of Islam is just laughable anyway. Once you do that there isn’t much left.

Just a few garbled Bible stories and an unpredictable God, who at his best views us as slaves and at worst as victims he has created for his own sadistic pleasure.Islam came to the world solely through Mohammed. The whole Koran was revealed to him alone.

Much of it is concerned with the events of his life.

It is a core Islamic belief that Mohammed is the last Prophet of Allah and no others will follow. The tales of other prophets are brought to believers only through Mohammed’s retelling. So once again I ask, what do we have left if we take Mohammed out of Islam?

Even supposing that you could somehow salvage something of value, where would that leave Sharia law?

In surveys, a large percentage of Muslims, even in the West, profess a desire to live under Sharia Law. This is laughable really. All Muslims must believe in Sharia. The word “Sharia” means “Way” or “Path” as in “the path to travel to be a Muslim.”

To be a Muslim without believing in the supremacy of Sharia is like being a Christian without believing in Jesus.

And what is the basis of Sharia? Mohammed and the Koran of course. Without these two, we would have to rely on “man-made laws” which true Muslims have always considered to be an abomination.

It is pointless to create a new version of Islam without the bad bits anyway. We already have one. It’s called Christianity.

Since the turn of this century, it is believed that millions of Muslims have left Islam and risked death by secretly converting.

During the same time frame, around a billion Muslim babies have been born. Do the math. Hoping for the mass conversion of Muslims is not the answer on its own.

This is especially true when most Christians have neither the courage, nor the faith in their own faith to call out Islam for what it really is.

Most seem content to slink into dhimmified subservience. They ignore even their own first commandment to, “Have no other God before Me.”

Surprisingly, having said all of that, I strongly believe that Islam is all but finished. It is like a vampire caught outdoors before the dawn. As the light of knowledge and understanding shine upon its secrets, it will crumble and fall, like a rotting corpse.

Islam has always relied on two methods to propagate itself, violence and deception. Violence isn’t going to work for much longer. Despite the love of violence which Islam encourages, Muslims aren’t very good at it.

The only way they successfully hurt others is by blowing themselves up in the process. It isn’t hard to deal with this kind of violence. Just make sure you don’t get too close to them. We have the tools to do that. They are called borders.

Once our leaders rediscover the purpose of these “barbarous relics” (as the Europeans seem to be doing) then Muslims will be restricted to killing each other.

Deception is a different matter of course. This is where Muslims have traditionally excelled themselves.

Unfortunately for them, that particular gravy train doesn’t run too well on the information superhighway. Even our academics and leaders are finally starting to realise what the rest of us have known for some time.

Islam is a mental prison. It is an ideology that is 1400 years past its use by date. We don’t need to salvage the good bits of Islam any more than we needed to salvage the good bits of Nazism or Stalinism.

What we really need, is for our academics to finally admit the truth about Islam and to rediscover the basis of our own incredible culture.

Once they can do this, and articulate it clearly and confidently, Islam will fall in a heap. It can then be consigned, once and for all, to the dustbin of history. Barely a shot needs to be fired in the process.

As Sun Tsu told us 2500 years ago, “Know yourself; know your enemy, one hundred battles, one hundred victories.”

This war we are currently fighting is not against Muslims. Instead it is against the dhimmified Left and their champions in academia, politics, the media and our other institutions.

For years, this may have seemed like an exercise in futility. Now however, it looks as if we are starting to make some serious headway.

While I may not agree with the solution proposed by Harris and Nawaz, I still consider this “baby step” to be a giant leap in the right direction.

By finally admitting the truth, they open the way for debate on a realistic and workable solution to the challenge of Islam. For that, they have my gratitude.


Hebrews 1:1-4
God’s Last Prophet
1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets,
2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;
3 who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our[b] sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
4 having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

You are drip feeding little tidbits...I await further answers [see above].

Habakkuk chapter 2. -
1. I WILL stand on my guard post And station myself on the rampart; And I will keep watch to see what He will speak to me, And how I may reply when I am reproved.
2. Then the LORD answered me and said, Record the vision And inscribe it on tablets, That the one who reads it may run.
3. For the vision is yet for the appointed time; It hastens toward the goal and it will not fail. Though it tarries, wait for it; For it will certainly come, it will not delay.
4. Behold, as for the proud one, His soul is not right within him; But the righteous will live by his faith.
5. Furthermore, wine betrays the haughty man, So that he does not stay at home. He enlarges his appetite like Sheol, And he is like death, never satisfied. He also gathers to himself all nations And collects to himself all peoples.
6. Will not all of these take up a taunt-song against him, Even mockery and insinuations against him And say, ” Woe to him who increases what is not his — For how long — And makes himself rich with loans?’
7. Will not your creditors rise up suddenly, And those who collect from you awaken? Indeed, you will become plunder for them.
8. Because you have looted many nations, All the remainder of the peoples will loot you — Because of human bloodshed and violence done to the land, To the town and all its inhabitants.
9. Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house To put his nest on high, To be delivered from the hand of calamity!
10. You have devised a shameful thing for your house By cutting off many peoples; So you are sinning against yourself.

So you think I am ranting? [lol. You clearly have not seen me rant...I will tell you when I am]. That's fine, I think you & Mr Zundel are stark, staring, barking mad [that was a 'rant' btw]. I will ask again: “Please tell me that Zundel did not write fiction? I am stating a fact I'm afraid [if you can't see that], but I'll make you a deal. Answer any one of my questions above [which you plainly have not done as yet] & I will watch the remainder of the 1st 20mins I have watched of 'your idol'. You still haven't told me why I should believe what this fellow says, given that he believes in Holocaust denial [an historical rant there, just fact!], AND the baloney that Nazis built space ships & relocated to Antarctica, or the Moon etc etc. So, um,where are these Nazis now? Still waiting to strike? I don't know why you mentioned 'off planet' UFO's above..irrelevant to my points: 1.that Nazi's did not build space ships..[yes, I have read extensively on this!] & 2. that Zunder discredits himself in so many other ways, I.E. You do realise that he is a conspiracy theorist & populist author of that time in the 60's, 70's etc. Frankly, I hold him in the same regard as a certain L Ron Hubbard, who invented a 'cult' that Tom Cruise & other deluded folk believe is a religion that aliens brought to Earth or some such tripe. I may be gullible...but, please, answer at least one or two of my questions with a simple yes or no & I will give you some credence. It's that easy.

To Harry Richardson, Warrior.

While you are to be complimented on your obviously prodigious amount of effort in alerting all to the insidious predatory nature of the evil religion of Islam, I presume you will agree with me that you could have phrased your comment quoted here from this article, more clearly or precisely….

“It is pointless to create a new version of Islam without the bad bits anyway. We already have one. It’s called Christianity.”

To associate Islam in any way with Christianity, is flat out wrong. A folly of the first magnitude that proponents for the NWO are marketing as ‘Chrislam’ in an effort to emasculate the jihadist elements within Islam.

You would of course know that Christianity is the total antithesis of Islam being 180° opposed, and that it is not a religion as understood by the religious and secular of this world, instead being a personal relationship and ongoing fellowship with our Creator.

If on the other hand I presume too much, you could verify my claim by a quick visit to Google, or better yet an in depth search of www.gracethrufaith a non-sectarian web site.

I can recommend your book on Islam to any enquirer, and rank it up there with Craig Winns’ Prophet of Doom.

Thank you for your past articles on Islam, people do read them, and they will continue to bear fruit.


OzB, You have suddenly gone from debate to rant. You won't watch a 2 hour video because of your prejudgment of it, that's very intellectual. And if you are not prepared to do even 2 hrs research into this matter then I'm afraid you have lost your credibility. You are behaving like a brainwashed university student who is trying to brainwash others, not by by your knowledge, but by your outrage. It is possible that incwhat has you pegged as well. Your tunnel vision seems only concerned with the Muslim situation, just like the Israelis concern about Palestinians you might say...As far as off planet UFO's are concerned, science has yet to produce any evidence to say that such things exist.

Quadrant nails it again:

Oh, & please don't tell me you subscribe to his other 'mainstream' view [<insert hysterical & derisive laughter track>] i.e. "in the 1970s, he became interested in UFOlogy when the subject was at its peak of worldwide attention. His main offerings were his own books claiming that flying saucers were secret weapons developed by the Third Reich and now based in Antarctica". Riiiiight! So, final question, do you think this movie [Iron Sky] is A. A factual documentary or B. A satire?
You be the judge...
If your answer is A, I have nothing further to say on this matter.

Wow, & the Leftist MSM in Oz calls 'us' anti-Islam folk with a point of view Fascists, 'racists' & Far Right neo-Nazi bigots. I think Mr. Zundel was the founder of that movement & holds 'copyright', especially from what I see online about his "co-authored "The Hitler We Loved and Why" and Richard Verrall's "Did Six Million Really Die? The Truth At Last", which were both significant documents of the Holocaust denial movement" etc. I don't need any more indoctrination...nice try though.

Please tell me Mr. Ernst Zundel is not a holocaust denier?? I'm not watching a 2 hr video of some 'obscure' Nazi sympathiser, even if the Jews are taking over the Earth [I am in no fear of a rabid Rabbi lopping off my head..period]. Seriously? Holocaust deniers, no matter what else they believe, are irrelevant. Sorry, but I think you'll have to find something a bit more the meantime, I think I'll devote my energy to the anti-Islamic movement in Australia [rather than the anti-Jew sentiment]. Do u seriously believe the Islamic threat, jihad & a world wide Islamic Caliphate 'goal [i.e. as planned by Saudi Arabia & the cult of Wahhabi-ism etc] is a result of Jewish planning, intervention or orchestration? Yes or no will be fine...

Love your work Harry. Thanks

I have just read in my email from Jerusalem Post that ISIS has bound hand and foot 200 Christian Syrian CHILDREN and executed them by firing squad. How can the left support such barbarism?

I find it very difficult to understand the reasoning of an individual who condemns Christianity and upholds Islam in this day and age and under the current world situation. No human being is perfect. More is being done to help their fellow man by Christians than is being done by Islam in this current world climate.

By the By, the twitterati and left msm etch, have already got their hooks into Bernard Gaynor for being a Chrisitian. He is a strong character and I am sure will stand very very tall.

OzB, I think you could be out of your depth here. Watch the link and comeback.

We are busily funding the spread of this disease. Bernard Gaynor has a list of all the tax payer's money that has gone to Muslim organisations. Add to that halal certification fees, State grants and Centrelink payments and you can see we are funding our own demise.

"Islamization of Europe a good thing"
A 2012 article by a rabbi who approves of the Islamization of Europe is of interest because such thinking is widespread among Jews. Rabbi Baruch Erfrati, a yeshiva head and West Bank settler, wrote that:
"the Islamization of Europe was better than a Christian Europe for ethical and theological reasons – as a punishment against Christians for persecuting the Jews and the fact that Christianity, as opposed to Islam, is considered "idolatry" from a halachic point of view."
"Jews should rejoice at the fact that Christian Europe is losing its identity as a punishment for what it did to us for the hundreds of years were in exile there," the rabbi explained as the ethical reason for favoring Muslims, quoting shocking descriptions from the Rishonim literature (written by leading rabbis who lived during the 11th to 15th centuries) about pogroms and mass murders committed by Christians against Jews.
"We will never forgive Europe's Christians for slaughtering millions of our children, women and elderly… Not just in the recent Holocaust, but throughout the generations, in a consistent manner which characterizes all factions of hypocritical Christianity…
"And now, Europe is losing its identity in favor of another people and another religion, and there will be no remnants and survivors from the impurity of Christianity, which shed a lot of blood it won't be able to atone for."
Such opinions would be of little note except that there are indications that such attitudes are widespread among Jews. I wrote an article on this a while ago, motivated by the statement of another rabbi, Joshua Hammerman, commenting on football player Tim Tebow's strong Christian faith:
If Tebow wins the Super Bowl, against all odds, it will buoy his faithful, and emboldened faithful can do insane things, like burning mosques, bashing gays and indiscriminately banishing immigrants. While America has become more inclusive since Jerry Falwell’s first political forays, a Tebow triumph could set those efforts back considerably. (my emphasis) ...
The deep fear of Christianity—especially when it’s emotionally compelling—is mother’s milk to American Jews. For example, Israeli patriot Elliott Abrams acknowledges that the mainstream Jewish community in America “clings to what is at bottom a dark vision of America, as a land permeated with anti-Semitism and always on the verge of anti-Semitic outbursts.” According to Abrams, because of this vision, Jews have taken the lead in secularizing America. In fact, the key role of Jewish organizations in shaping the Constitutional law on Church/State relations is well known. And it’s not much of a mystery who’s behind the war on Christmas; Hollywood certainly hates it, as Edmund Connelly reminds us (see here and here).
Or Joel Kotkin: “For generations, [American] Jews have viewed religious conservatives with a combination of fear and disdain.”
Or Norman Podhoretz:
[The Jews] emerged from the Middle Ages knowing for a certainty that — individual exceptions duly noted — the worst enemy they had in the world was Christianity: the churches in which it was embodied — whether Roman Catholic or Russian Orthodox or Protestant — and the people who prayed in and were shaped by them. It was a knowledge that Jewish experience in the ages to come would do very little, if indeed anything at all, to help future generations to forget. (See here.)
Or Steve Sailer describing Steven Pinker’s
deep-rooted aversion to engaging intellectually with the effects of Christianity. His distaste for the culture of Christendom before the Enlightenment is palpable. For instance, he responds to historian Barbara Tuchman’s summary of medieval economic theory with, “As my grandfather would have put it, ‘Goyische kopp!’—gentile head.” This old family attitude seems to make this otherwise very bright scholar’s interpretations of the last 2,000 years rather obtuse.
This fear and loathing of Christianity is mainstream among the numerically dominant liberal Jews like Hammerman—the 80 % of American Jews who voted for Obama.
So when we come across statements like Rabbi Erfrati's, they should be added to what is a very long tradition. This fear persists despite the fact that large swaths of American Protestantism are philo-Semitic, including many millions who are rabidly pro-Israel.
Finally, Erfrati's statement reminds us that this fear and loathing of Christian societies is one of the motivations for Jewish support of non-White, non-Christian immigration. If indeed the worst enemy in the world for Jews is Christianity, as Podhoretz says, a solution is to make European societies non-Christian. These themes come together in my article "Why so much Jewish fear and loathing of Donald Trump": The real fear is that "Trump might actually do something on immigration, legal and illegal, that would slow White dispossession, and that this could perhaps snowball into something far greater, with unknown consequences." The real concern is that Trump would roll back the ongoing onslaught against White Christian America.

Mate, I have no idea what you just said...& instead of being combative [I have merely been curious] why don't u try & educate me. Or am I too far gone? Payroll? You are dreamin' pal, I'm on no-one's payroll...self-funded retiree. [who hates Jews, Islamists, Leftists & combative, fixated people...if you want to believe I'm on the 'payroll'..nudge nudge wink wink..knock yourself out, no skin off my nose]. Instead of convincing me of your stance or argument, you have done the opposite. I'm not trying to sell you any belief system of my own...but I believe if people are right & willing to debate with objectivity & knowledge, then they can also handle 'robust' or healthy debate. Instead you are 1st defensive, now combative? Well done, that's the way to make me believe you. Good day.

What is 'goy'...& btw it's 'baa baa' black sheep, not bah bah...which is an exclamation, as in 'Bah!', what the hell are u crazy conspiracy nut jobs talking about! Or, if I understand 1% of your bleatings [& the single author you base your entire belief system on , i.e. a bloke called Efrati...couldn't care less] you are saying the Lindt cafe siege, the 15yr old shooting a police employee in Australia etc etc [won't even talk about O/S...let's keep it to Oz will we?] is all because a Jewish bloke called Efreti said so. All that means my deluded people is that he is as batshit crazy as the Islamist, raving mad, Wahhibi Imams. Or can't you seethis? Efreti is 'mainstream' in your opinion & represents the views of all?