by Hugo Jenks, Islam Spokesman
1st July 2020
The purpose of a court of law is to ascertain the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and to administer justice based upon truthful findings. Yet the search for truthfulness is sidelined when Islam is involved. Two court cases in England have demonstrated this to be so: in both, the defendant had made an accurate assessment of Islam, that it does indeed enable the rape of captive women and girls. However, the judges, in both trials, disagreed with the defendant. Can we prove these judges to be wrong? Yes, indeed we can. Read on…
Islam may be defined as the faith deriving from the Koran and Islam’s prophet, Mohammed; whose biography and teachings are found in the established Sunna, Sira and Hadiths. Mohammed is regarded by Muslims as the perfect man. This supposedly perfect man kept sex slaves, as is well documented in mainstream Islamic scriptures.
One significant reason why Muslims turn away from Islam is that they find its teachings morally repugnant. Ex-Muslim scholar and former preacher Ishmael has stated one of the reasons he left Islam:
“[because of] the Koran and Mohammed, and their teachings on moral standards and conduct. You see, over the past few years I have found that I am no longer able to defend the Koran and especially Mohammed’s morals and conduct. In the past I have done my best to defend Islam and in particular to defend Mohammed from the claims and charges made against him. I tried my best to love Mohammed, and I can prove that I stood up for him and defended him many times… As shocking as it may seem, both the Koran and Mohammed teach that it’s permissible, Halal, to capture and rape female war captives, even if these women are married and their non-Muslim husbands are still alive. [i.e. it is not regarded as adultery in this case] So let’s investigate the Islamic sources to see what they say: The Koran …informs Muslim men about the categories of women who they are forbidden … ‘except those whom your right hands possess’.”
A search of the Koran reveals a number of verses containing the phrase ‘right hands possess’, referring to women owned by Muslim men whom they are permitted to have sexual intercourse with: Koran 4:3, Koran 4:24-25, Koran 33:50, Koran 70:30, Koran 23:6.
The Abrogated Koran is available as a free download:
Ex-Muslim Ishmael continued:
“No sane person in his or her right mind could defend the Koran and Mohammed on this issue. This is nothing more than legalised rape of married women, and I cannot believe that this is from God. So therefore I am rejecting the Koran and Mohammed on this issue. Now you have some idea why I left Islam.”
Ishmael is courageous – the penalty for leaving Islam is death. See the video: “Why I left Islam”, on YouTube channel “Don’tConvert2Islam“. Forcing a religion upon someone with such threats of violence itself demonstrates the weakness of that religion, not its strength.
It is now necessary to prove that Islam is of necessity fundamentalist, with no real scope for other interpretations. The Koran itself demands that Islam is interpreted as a fundamentalist religion. There can therefore be no such thing as “moderate Islam”. Those Muslims who think this is possible are either deceiving themselves or are seeking to deceive non-Muslims. In proof that Islam can only be fundamentalist, see this verse as an example:
Koran 3:7. He it is Who hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture wherein are clear revelations – they are the substance of the Book – and others (which are) allegorical. But those in whose hearts is doubt pursue, forsooth, that which is allegorical seeking (to cause) dissension by seeking to explain it. None knoweth its explanation save Allah. And those who are of sound instruction say: We believe therein; the whole is from our Lord; but only men of understanding really heed.
In other words, this entire paragraph states that no interpretation is necessary and that all verses must be taken as they are written. Literally! A fundamental Islam is the only permissible Islam, according to the Koran itself. It is not possible for anyone to pick and choose verses that they like. Often apologists for Islam will quote the “no compulsion in religion” verse, attempting to support a “moderate” interpretation:
Koran 2:256. There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
However, note that these apologists will never tell you that this verse is abrogated – effectively nullified. And you will never be told by them that it has been abrogated by the Verse of the Sword, Koran 9:5. Apologists seek to deceive, or as a minimum they deceive themselves.
The testimony of ex-Muslims is powerful indeed. They have studied Islam, lived it, and for a time believed it and defended it. They really do know what they are talking about. Why then should non-Muslim judges disregard the evidence of Islamic scriptures, and the testimony of ex-Muslims? Evidently such judges are not interested in determining the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
The defendant in both trials referred to earlier was Tommy Robinson. At Canterbury Crown Court, Judge Heather Norton criticised Robinson for using phrases such as “Muslim child rapists”. At another hearing, at the Royal Courts of Justice, the report dated the 9th July 2019 states:
“… he gave graphic and disturbing examples of other historic sexual offences committed by Muslim men; and suggested that ‘sexual slaves’ are permitted, if not encouraged, by Islam as a religion”.
Why can’t these judges look up the Islamic scriptural references for themselves, rather than being prejudiced in favour of Islam? The information is freely available. Islam is of necessity a fundamentalist religion. There can be no “moderate”, contextual interpretation of the phrase “right hands possess”. It clearly refers to women owned by Muslim men, who they can rape.
The rape of captive girls and women by Muslim men has been proven permissible within the Koran. The testimonies of ex-Muslims back up this interpretation. They have become the captives of gangs of Muslim men via coercion, alcohol, and drugs. Furthermore, there can be no doubt that genuine mainstream Islam does indeed permit and condone such rapes. The proof is readily available in the public domain.
We must strive to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. It is deeply concerning that the Courts are attempting to suppress the true root of the Muslim rape gangs – namely, the teachings of the Koran and the acts of Mohammed. With an estimated minimum of 19,000 girls raped by Muslim gangs in the UK in 2019, it is extremely irresponsible for those in authority, including the Courts, to continue to deny the truth 
We can surmise that hundreds of thousands of Muslim men may be responsible, from the gang members themselves, through to their paying clients, and those who know about it but fail to notify the authorities. There are simply not enough prison places available, and maybe this is one reason why the authorities are soft on this matter. They are thereby, however, supporting the worst aspects of Islam. The paradox is that Tommy Robinson, in his unorthodox and controversial approach, is supporting traditional values and true justice, while the Courts, by suppressing this truth that the root is Islam itself, are in effect ushering in Sharia law and delaying the possibility of justice and protection for these girls.
 “Muslim rape gangs exploited 19,000 children in past year, actual figure may be much higher.” Jihad Watch, Dec 30, 2019