Formerly the Thinking Catholic Strategic Center
Site best viewed on a computer screen - not optimized for cell phones
50 most recent articles updated on this Web-Site: BLOG (Web-Log) Page
Vic Biorseth, Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Definition of Islam: Ideology of military conquest masquerading as a religion, based on the supposedly prophetic teaching of Mohammed.
All the world, and just about any dictionary definition of Islam, recognizes Islam as a major monotheistic religion, characterized chiefly by the doctrines requiring absolute submission to God, recognition of Mohammed as the final prophet of God, and recognition of the Koran as the final word of God. That, in a nutshell, is the official, recognized definition of Islam that you will find everywhere you look. But, it is a definition that is largely supplied by Islam, or from within Islam, which would be the first logical place you might look to get a good definition and understanding.
However, I submit that the definition of Islam that most all of the world recognizes as correct is quite wrong, in the same way that so much of the world accepts a false Definition of Marxism, because Marxism is in truth a very carefully and artfully crafted fraud. You can see the explanation of the fraud of Marxism in the Refuting Marx page. Marxism, too, is nothing other than a strategy of conquest, via the path of violent revolution.
Islam, like Marxism, needs to be examined from the outside, which means that we need to look at the history of its development since birth. Any movement that has been around for any length of time can be judged by what it has done and how it has behaved. With movements inspired by Marx, we can look at the history of Nazi-Fascism and the history of Communism; in a similar manner, we can look at Islamic lands and Islamic history.
Islam publicly claims to be a religion of peace, and that description has been added into most official definitions of Islam. However, these definitions are called into question by history. All across Africa and the Middle East, in the historical advancement of Islam, every land that “converted” to Islam, was won over to Islam via the sword, not through peaceful conversion. No exceptions. Most, if not all, of the current African nations that are today Islamic were once Christian, and they were forced, under pain of death, to submit to Islam. Thus we may see that Islam is a “religion” of conquest by war.
Religion, or Ideology? In open defiance of the definition of Islam that you have probably held all your life, I submit that Islam, as a religion, is a fraud, and that it was a fraud from the beginning. You can see the details of Mohammed’s life in the Refuting Mohammed page.
Essentially, Mohammed claimed to have been visited by an angel of God and called to prophesy. Perhaps he had a dream or a hallucination, or the imaginative birth of what would develop into an elaborate scheme, but there was no visit by any angel. Or if there was, then it was the wrong kind of angel. Under encouragement and coaxing from his rich elderly wife, he eventually went public with his being “chosen” as God’s prophet. His initial preaching regarding his being God’s prophet at Mecca largely fell on deaf ears; other than a small following, he was largely rejected.
He turned to Jews and Christians, again without much success. He radically modified his original teaching – his “prophesy” – and took it back to the leaders of Mecca, and again was rejected and scoffed at. At the death of his wife, and a powerful relative, and the loss of the protection of a powerful clan, he and his entourage fled Mecca for Medina, where he began his “religion.” From there, after gaining political power through religious persuasion, he became increasingly fierce, politically powerful, warlike and vengeful. He launched attacks against the caravans going in and out of Mecca, and murderous attacks against the Jews wherever he could find them. Islam here became a strategy of conquest. Whomever he faced, he offered the opportunity to convert and accept him as the last prophet of God, or, to submit to his absolute legal authority in humiliation and pay a special tax, or, to be put to the sword.
That has been the nature of Islam ever since. Convert, submit, or die; those are your only three options. That’s why I say that the true definition of Islam is an ideology of military conquest masquerading as a religion. Again, you can see the details in the Refuting Mohammed page, and in the various articles linked in the right hand column of that page.
Jihadist Terrorism committed in the name of Islam is grossly misinterpreted throughout the world and in America as a deviation and a perversion of Islamic teaching and thought. But it is standard fare in the world of Islam. It is completely orthodox and mainstream. Most of the West has it exactly reversed; it is the truly peaceful Moslem who perverts or twists Islamic teaching. Moslems do not commit acts of terrorism against non-Moslems until they really get into their religion. The most peaceful Moslems are the least religious.
As an example, let’s compare the words of Osama Bin Laden with the words of the Koran:
How does that fit your definition of Islam as a religion of peace? Any honest definition of Islam should at least mention that it intends to convert you, dominate you or kill you. And, you might think that an honest definition of Islam should at least mention the fact that, once you are converted into Islam, if you ever change your mind and convert to some other religion, you thereby incur a death sentence upon yourself.
In America as in any nation that believes in such taken-for-granted notions as citizen liberty and/or national sovereignty and/or national self-determination, a true definition of Islam should clearly state that Islam Islam opposes liberty, and freedom of religion, and freedom of speech, and freedom of the press, as these things address Islam, Mohammed and the Koran. And a true definition of Islam should clearly state that Islam opposes and intends to eliminate such things as nations, borders and self-determination, of individuals and of nations. An honest definition of Islam would state that Islam, like Marxism, seeks to form a New World Order, and to rule the world with an iron fist. That is the core, central idea of Islam.
Now, just about everybody describes Osama Bin Laden as the preeminent example of one who epitomizes what is described as Islamic Extremism, or Jihadism, or Militant Islamism, or Perverted Islam, or Hijacked Islam, or Islamofascism, or some such pejorative term, indicating that it is not the correct Islam, which is a religion of peace. I submit for your consideration the statement that there is not one whit of difference between what Osama Bin Laden did, after issuing fair warning, that is not in absolute full compliance with the Koran. And, I submit that, within Islam, the Koran is held to be the irrevocable word of God spoken through his prophet Mohammed. All Moslems are called by the Koran to do these things.
Dar Al-Islam Versus Dar Al-Harb. Dar Al-Islam is the House of Islam, meaning, the House of Submission. That is where everyone is in submission to Islamic religion and Islamic law, and the only place where there is peace and where Allah is merciful. Dar Al-Harb is the House of War. That is where we infidels (non-Moslems) live. The whole goal of Islam is to expand the House of Islam at the expense of the House of War.
The ultimate goal of Islam is global domination. Islam is a theocracy; a radical combination of Church and State. The global goal of men like Osama Bin Laden is to bring the whole world into submission to the Islamic religion and Islamic law, or Sharia.
What the true definition of Islam should say is something like this: Islam is a belligerent, aggressive, intolerant, violent, theocratic ideology aimed at global conquest. And that’s exactly what it was from the very beginning.
That’s the real definition of Islam.
Sarcastic Acronym Hover-Link Footnotes: For the convenience of those readers using devices that lack a mouse, these footnotes are provided for all webpages, in case any webpage contains any hover-links. (If you don't have a mouse, you can't "hover" it over a link without clicking just to see the simple acronym interpretation. Click any footnote link to see the acronym and a detailed explanation.)SLIMC1 Secularist Liberal Intellectual Media Complex
[All Web Pages listed in Site Map by date-of-publication;
oldest at the top, newest at the bottom of the list.]
The Brilliantly Conceived Organization of the USA; Vic Biorseth
Return to the BLOG page
Return to the HOME PAGE
Subscribe to our Free E-Zine News Letter
Respond to This Article Below The Last Comment
Date: Wed Jan 25 05:48:11 2012
You call this a definition of Islam but it is not a definition of Islam, it is a polemic against Islam. Christians and Jews are held to be our brothers as people of the book. Why don’t you quote the peaceful verses but only the stronger ones? You are no Muslim scholar. How can you claim to properly interpret something you so strongly oppose at the outset? This is not a definition but an outrageous and insensitive attack. You should be ashamed.
Date: Wed Jan 25 06:39:20 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
This may be one of the few honest definitions of Islam you will find. I readily admit that it is a polemic, and that I am a polemical kind of guy. But it is also an accurate definition of Islam.
The “kinder and gentler” verses of Islam you speak of were written of the period before Mohammed fled Mecca and entered Medina; the conquering “convert, submit or die” verses were written after, and as later verses, they displace and abrogate the earlier verses. The later written verses are the ones that stand. See if you can find another definition of Islam that will tell you that simple fact.
In broad terms, the kill the Jews Islamic sentiment replaces the be nice to the Jews sentiment, because Mohammed developed that sentiment second, not first. Whenever he said anything that conflicted with something he had previously said, the latest statement takes precedence, abrogating the previous. See the Refuting Mohammed page.
This is a polemic, yes. But it is also an accurate definition of Islam. And I am not ashamed, but quite proud to stand in the Truth.
Date: Tue Jun 05 19:12:05 2012
Thank you for the most concise definition of Medieval Europe during the height of Catholic power ever written. Now, does the theocratic totalitarian abuses and aggressive wars of Medieval Catholicism define Catholicism? If not, why the double standard with Islam? If so, then why don't you condemn your own faith?
Date: Tue Jun 05 19:58:35 2012
From: Vic Biorseth
You’re very welcome; however, this is not a definition of Medieval Europe, or a definition of Catholicism or Catholic power. It is a definition of Islam, today, and a definition which I submit was accurate the day Islam was invented.
I do not condemn my faith because the Catholic Church is not a theocracy. The only place on earth that it is a theocracy is in Vatican City. Everywhere else on earth, the Church insists upon maintaining the division between civil and ecclesial authority. No cleric or vowed religious, for instance, may hold any civil public office without prior papal consent and a temporary removal of ecclesial office. Even in medieval Europe there was always a distinct separation between popes and emperors.
Islam, on the other hand, is everywhere a permanent, unbreakable combination of civil and theological law. As such, it is both anti-American and anti-Christian. Look to the links in the right column of this page.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Converted Page to SBI! Release 3.0 BB 2.0.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Added link into Sociological Definition Pages right-column link set.
Date: Sun Apr 21 01:12:27 2013
Sir, Islam has never used violence upon anyone to turn to Islam, everyone was given a choice whether to embrace Islam or live freely without any harm. Jewish and Christian were the one to start war against Muslims . People threw Stones upon our Prophet(PBUH) when he came to them with a new religion.
Usama and all these talibans were made by US when US needed to Defeat Russia in Afghanistan. They have the latest weapons because they were once your, you helped them you gave them the weapons but after that defeated Russia and took control of Afghanistan then US called the the terrorist. How can you justify this?
Islam has taught us to never use force to make someone turn to Islam. The verses which you mention from Islam are formed the time when christian and Jewish were commiting atrocities on other people. Islam has taught us to fight when there is unjustice, violence on humans, when people have fallen to lowest moral standards. Islam has taught us to to fight for innocent people who are killed by your troops and supporters like Israel and US. No one asked US to attack Iraq, how can you justify this?
Date: Sun Apr 21 01:12:27 2013
From: Vic Biorseth
Your first statement is a lie. Islam used violence, over and over again, in forcing whole peoples to submit to Islam.
Your second statement is a lie. Islam didn't exist yet when Mohammed first met with Christians and Jews, and they did not attack him.
Your third statement is a lie. Osama and the Taliban pre-existed US support against Russia in Afghanistan.
Al Queda flew highjacked airliners into American buildings - that is how I call them terrorists.
Your final statements are also lies. Islam directly teaches adherents to use violence against non-believers until they are believers, or in submission to Islamic law, or dead.
The typical Islamic monstrous murderer Saddam Hussein was using WMD against people and developing more, among a hotbed area of murderous Islam; that is how the attacks against Iraq were justified.
See the Bush Lied People Died page.
Date: Wed Sep 10 2014
From: Vic Biorseth
Changes pursuant to changing the website URL
and name from
Thinking Catholic Strategic Center to
Catholic American Thinker.
Pulled the trigger on the 301 MOVE IT option June 1, 2014. Working my way through all the webpages. .
Date: Thu May 19 12:59:00 2016
Location: virginia usa
You are 100% Correct! ...& What a Mask-QueRade....
Date: Fri May 20 16:37:55 2016
When an old man can marry a 6 year old girl and consummate it when she is 9 says it all. When your so called god says you can murder your female relatives because they spoke to a unrelated male it is a serious problem. A man who can marry his own daughter in law is a problem. A man who is not sure if God or Satan is speaking to him is a problem. A religion which condones prostitution but allows temporary marriages whether for 1 hour or months and maybe years has a problem. Why does Islam allow the DANCING BOYS OF Afghanistan? A god that requests to kill all who do not follow this pervert is a problem. Do Muslims not understand free will? Of course not unless it suits them. They seem to have no problem rioting to replace one dictator for another and rioting when food prices increase, or someone claims the CHILD MOLESTER was slandered or someone claims that the Koran was mishandled. The ultimate problem is Muslims do not want to take responsibility for their actions, but blame it on the Koran and hey we get our 72 virgins. Islam is a Satanic cult not a religion. They claim racism when it suits them, but you cannot be converted to a race. Islam is consumed with sex and yet tries to deny it. What kind of pervert cannot control himself if he sees a women's ankle or her hair? What kind of man decides it is o.k to rape and grope children and women who want to get together? What kind of man uses his religion and culture to justify his perversions? This is a culture of death invented by Satan to justify the rape and defilement of women and children. Where are the peaceful and loving Muslims the media keeps talking about? Why do Muslims understand Western Law when they can take advantage of it, but claim Islamaphobia when their perversions contradict Western law? So many questions and so few answers from the western elite.
Never be lukewarm.
Life itself demands passion.
He who is indifferent to God has already forfeited his soul.
He who is indifferent to politics has already forfeited his liberty.
In America, religion is not mere window dressing and citizenship is not a spectator sport.
Do not allow our common destiny as a whole people to just happen without your input.
Get in the fight! Engage the Enemy!
Seek the Truth; find the Way; live the Life; please God, and live forever.
All Published Articles
By Publication Date
Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and
broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in
thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life:
and few there are that find it! Beware of false prophets, who come to you in
the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Jesus Christ; Matt 7:13-15
Sociological Definition Pages
Definitions of all the "isms" with a lot of consensus of thinking behind them, which makes them popular opinions or ideas seeking political favor.
Definition of Marxism: Total control of means of production, including workers. The definition of Marxism describes the social, economic and governmental philosophy of Karl Marx, co-author of the Communist Manifesto.
Definition of Freudianism: The psychoanalytical thought and practice of Freud, Jung and Kinsey. This definition of Freudianism addresses Sigmund Freud's turn of psychological focus from cognition and intellect to the unconscious & subconscious mind.
The definition of Darwinism in a nutshell. In the definition of Darwinism we find the foundational priciples upon which the quest for the atheist holy grail: the purely material origin of life itself.
Definition of Islam: Ideology of Military Conquest Masquerading as a Religion. The Definition of Islam describes the “Convert, Submit or Die” War Strategy of Mohammed.
The term Marxist defined: Marxism today has overtaken many earlier terms. Re the term Marxist defined in contemporary usage. The term Liberal doesn’t mean what it used to mean either.
Definition of Conservatism: "That government is best that governs the least." A definition of conservatism must recognize that, politically speaking, the terms Liberal and Conservative have traded places.
Definition of Libertarian : A Pro-Constitutional Practical Atheist. The definition of Libertarian describes a religiously-cleansed conservatism defending core American political values while denying moral absolutes.
Definition of Capitalism: Economic Organization based on Private Property. Any true definition of Capitalism must state that it is purely an Economic system, not a Government system, and it works most efficiently and profitably under Representative Government.
Our argument supporting the Rule of Subsidiarity, practicality and common sense. The moral and organizational Rule of Subsidiarity is crucial to the rights of man and essential for freedom.
Definition of Communism: Marx's theoretical classless utopian society. The Marxian definition of Communism involves the theoretical, perfect, classless society with common ownership of all economic "means of production."
Definition of Fascism: System of Marxism resisting the Worker's Revolution. A true definition of Fascism must recognize its deep roots in Marxism.
Definition of Anarchy: Opposition to State Authority in favor of - well - Gangs. They said it couldn’t be done; but even the most cursory Definition of Anarchy shows it to be even more stupid than Communism.
Definition of Socialism: Intermediary phase between Marxism and Communism. Definition of Socialism: 1) The older ideology with "collective" ownership of power and means of production; 2) Marx's "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat" evolving toward Communist Utopia.
Definition of Democracy: Ideology stressing direct or electoral majority rule. The definition of Democracy as a form of government involves policy and law determined by the actual, real majority of the people governed.
Definition of Republic: A state in which sovereignty rests with the people. This definition of Republic stresses autonomy and rule-of-law, and places the root of sovereignty in the people or their electorate.
Liberal Democracy defines elected representative government under rule-of-law. Liberal Democracy is differentiated from Social Democracy by not restricting the right to private property, which is to say, the means of production.
A pure Democracy that left the natural economy alone would be ideal. Pure Democracy in the Jeffersonian model, with unfettered free market Capitalism, would out-perform any other system.
Description of pure Socialism - the ideal that all Socialism is driving toward. A true, pure Socialism would be something considerably less than the Utopians dream of, since perfection is not of this world, or of this life, and will never be encountered in either.
Social Democracy defines an attempt to force-fit Marxist ideas into a Democracy. Social Democracy, neither fish nor foul, seeks, by devious means, by the gradual rather than revolutionary path, the ultimate victory of Communism, or, Communist Utopia.
Legally Destroying America, through Defining Treason Down. American Political Parties are swiftly dismantling Constitutional government, having first defined treason down to the point of non-existence.
Our definition of anti American goes considerably deeper than the dictionary. Anyone, anywhere, may oppose nationalism or national pride. Definition of anti American: one who ignores or opposes the American Constitution.
Our definition of pro American goes considerably deeper than the dictionary. Anyone, anywhere, may be a patriot. Definition of pro American: one who loves and adheres to the American Constitution.
"We belong to the Church militant; and She is militant because on earth the powers of darkness are ever restless to encompass Her destruction. Not only in the far-off centuries of the early Church, but down through the ages and in this our day, the enemies of God and Christian civilization make bold to attack the Creator’s supreme dominion and sacrosanct human rights.”--Pope Pius XII
"It is not lawful to take the things of others to give to the poor. It is a sin worthy of punishment, not an act deserving a reward, to give away what belongs to others."--St. Francis of Assisi
Truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is.—Winston Churchill
The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.—Ayn Rand
If you can't find the page you're looking for, try the