Radical Muslim
Radical Muslim
Radical Muslim

Interview with the Authors

On Writing Tea With Terrorists:

Why did you write such a controversial book?

The moment the second plane flew into the Twin Towers, I knew who was aboard and thought I knew why they were killing us. And I was convinced that our response would make the situation worse, not better. Sadly, I was right. So ultimately I did what I could to awaken the world and hopefully avert war - postpone Armageddon.

Why did Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda terrorists want to kill us?

First, they weren’t bin Laden’s terrorists. The second plan to destroy the World Trade Center was concocted in Germany. The pilots all came from Hamburg’s al-Kod mosque, whose clerics still tell the faithful that it is Allah’s will for them to slaughter Americans and Jews. As for why they killed us - the answer is as simple as the message the mullahs preach in the al-Kod mosque: Islam commands it. If interested, you’ll find bin Laden’s rationale on page 330.

Don’t you really mean an extremist or corrupted version of Islam?

No. And that was once as shocking to me as it probably is to you and your audience. I too believed our politicians and media. So I began my search into terrorism by trying to find some little thing that caused a small percentage of Muslims to act out violently. But that’s not what I found. Muslim militants are practicing mainstream Islam. They are not an extremist minority. Terrorists have not corrupted their religion. Their religion itself is corrupt. Al-Qaeda is not the enemy. They are but a symptom of a much more sinister and widespread disease.

It’s a free world, Mr. Winn. What gives you the right to ridicule someone else’s religion?

First, the Muslim world isn’t the least bit free. Second, when Muslims kill my people, I want to know why. Don’t you?

We already know who killed us, and why: terrorists, mostly from Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network. They did it because they don’t like our troops in Saudi Arabia and our warplanes being used to kill Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories.

Everything you just said is wrong. Terrorism is the legacy of Muhammad, not bin Laden. The raison d'être of Al-Qaeda’s existence, its popularity, its goals, even the means it uses to terrorize us, are all right out of the Qur’an. Muhammad ordered Muslims to deceive us, and from what I can tell they’re doing a bang-up job.

Was Tea With Terrorists written to discredit Islam?

I knew as little about Islam when I started writing Tea With Terrorists as do most Americans. Knowing nothing about it, I had no interest in condemning it. I thought that their killing us was a byproduct of an old family feud, the one between Isaac and Ishmael, Abraham’s two boys, an Arab-Jew thing. And while there is substance to that argument, it is but the seed, the kernel of truth, that gave rise to Islam’s hatred for Christians and Jews. The more I pulled back the layers of this onion, the more clearly I was able to see. This is not the story I wanted to tell. It is the story that needed to be told.

You do a lot more than blame Islam in Tea With Terrorists. Why did you attack other religions, liberal politics, and even some conservatives?

America is engulfed in a war, one that will continue to escalate into a global conflict unless we stop it. Like World Wars I and II, this war is not of our making. But just like the last two world wars, millions will die unless we stop it - nip it in the bud. To win this war, to save the world, we must save America first. We have separated ourselves from God, become morally bankrupt, and fiscally irresponsible - rewarding failure while punishing success. In essence, we have lost the high moral ground. As for religion, we only criticize the man-made rules that have led to ritualistic mind conditioning, racial hatred, and holy war.

Why is Tea With Terrorists written as a novel rather than nonfiction?

First, we can’t hope to postpone the global calamity that awaits us unless people read what we have to say. By writing an action-packed story with harrowing Special Forces operations, political intrigue, even a good romance, we make truth entertaining. With Tea With Terrorists you’ve get 300 pages of spine-tingling adventure with 300 pages of bone-jarring reality. As the legendary child psychologist, Mary Poppins, once said, "A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down." Second, we thought readers might enjoy a voyage of discovery, learning about all of this as we learned it, including meeting the terrorists themselves. And third, the truth requires a reaction, an emotional response.

Why you? You are not a scholar, a historian, a cleric, an investigative journalist, or even an a recognized expert in any of the subjects you cover. Although you are controversial, having been the subject of an unflattering book and Business Week cover story.

Everything you said is true. I have been slandered and liabled by some of the best. And that, oddly enough, is one of the three reasons I believe I was chosen to unravel this sordid tale. You can’t attack the media’s bias, political correctness, or liberal politics - as I did - without being crucified by the purveyors of such things. And it’s impossible to expose the root cause of terror without taking these folks to task. And then there is Islam, a religion so lame, Muhammad told Muslims to murder its critics. They call it a fatwa. Having been slandered and liabled in the media, I’m as immune to attack and callous to criticism as most anyone. The second reason is my ability to connect the dots. Most people see a confusing, unconnected world happening haphazardly all around them. I don’t. I’m able to tie things together, bring them into focus, and present explanations and solutions that few others see. But the third reason is really the only one that counts. I was willing. No one else was.

Some claim that the news accounts depict the real Craig Winn. They say that you’re too smart for your own good, a super salesman prone to exaggeration but not always trustworthy?

Messengers are often maligned, especially when they shine a harsh light on the things the establishment wants hidden. I exposed professional CEOs, corporate boards, auditors, investment bankers, analysts, politicians, and the media’s complicity, long before the public came to know their true colors. I explained why the markets would collapse while they were still rising. For this, my character was publicly maligned. If you’re curious about these things, I encourage you to read the only insider’s account of what is really killing corporate America - In the Company of Good and Evil."

Some have said that you have political ambitions. Is that true?

No. I am not running for anything or from anything.

What gives you the right to speak out on the decline of American values, morality, and other people’s religion? Are you some kind of saint on God’s errand?

I’m as flawed as anybody and I know it, which is probably one on the reasons I’m perfect for the job. I know my limitations.

You said that you were on a mission. What is that mission?

My agenda is simple and transparent. I want to tell the truth, and by doing so I hope to accomplish five things. First, I want to stop terrorists from killing Americans and Jews. Second, I want to postpone World War III, Armageddon. Third, I want to help save my country. Fourth, I would like to free the billion people who are currently living hellish lives, enslaved to a false, racist, repressive, and violent doctrine called Islam. And fifth, I would like people to know that God is, that he loves us, and that he wants us to know him.

Your mission is quite ambitious. How much of it do you expect to accomplish?

None. I am simply the messenger boy. My job is not to convince, simply to warn. I think this is somewhat analogous to the story of Jonah. God called him to warn the most powerful nation of his day, Assyria, that they would be destroyed if they continued living and acting as we do today. He went sailing instead, knowing how harshly the Assyrian establishment treated messengers critical to the status quo. But after surviving three days in the belly of a whale, Jonah summoned the courage to go. He delivered his message, Assyria listened, and they established a relationship with God rather than separating from him. Because they heeded Jonah’s warning they survived another 100 years. As God did with Jonah and Assyria, I’d like him to do with Craig and America. I’d like 100 years, but as I survey the forces at work both here and abroad, I’d settle for 20.

America spends $40 billion a year on intelligence gathering. How can your conclusions be right and our government’s wrong?

With $40 and a trip to a bookstore you can learn more about the cause of and the cure for terror than our nation’s intelligence community seems to know after spending $40 billion. Buy and read three books, the Bible, the Qur’an, and the Hadith of al-Bukhari and you’ll learn who the terrorists are, why they kill, and what can be done to stop them. The truth isn’t hidden.

On Meeting With Terrorists:

Why would you want to have tea with terrorists?

To learn what they think and find out why they want to kill us. I wanted it straight from the horse’s mouth, not twisted by the politicians’ spin, the media’s rhetoric, or the clerics’ agenda.

Why tea?

To keep them from killing us. It’s hard to shoot an assault rifle while holding a teacup. The longer we were with them, the angrier I became and the more hostile my questions grew. Our interpreter served tea to cool things down.

Isn’t meeting with terrorists a little dangerous?

I don’t recommend it. What we did, in retrospect, was far more dangerous than the lunch date in Pakistan that led to Daniel Pearl’s death.

How did you arrange the meeting?

Our guide was a Mossad agent. He knew a Palestinian businessman who was in quite a pickle. He was a member of Force 17, Yasser Arafat’s secret police, a group linked directly to terror. Though we change his name and occupation in the book, he’s a real guy who, to stay alive, has befriended some rather nasty individuals. We told him that we would do what we could to help him with the authorities if he would provide us with some introductions.

What was it like hanging with terrorists?

Frightening. Before going in, we had to sign papers that said in essence: What we wanted to do was stupid; we would probably be taken hostage and killed; and that there was nothing anyone could do to save us. The trip across the border, no man’s land, was harrowing, a James-Bondish rendezvous and ride into hell. The bunker we were taken to was right out of the movies, in the basement of a stone building. The ceilings were low. There was but one light, dangling from the ceiling, and one window - a slit covered with iron bars. All the terrorists were armed. You can’t even imagine how hostile an M-16 looks, loaded, safety off, and pointed right at you.

With whom did you meet?

Members of al-Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, and Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade. We met them in the basement of a building in what’s called Zone A - the battleground of Bethlehem. The means we used to make contact, the journey and the scene itself, the nature of the terrorists, my questions and their answers are all faithfully portrayed in the book, exactly as it happened. We just wrote the story’s main character into our own experience.

What did you learn?

Islam kills. These men said that Islam was their sole motivation.

Can you elaborate?

Muslims are taught in their schools to hate Americans and Jews - and to kill us. It’s preached in their mosques, proclaimed by their media, and required by the maniacal men they follow. We learned that promoting Islamic terror is all about the money.

How does money promote Islamic terror?

The terrorists we met with told us that money buys conformity and allegiance. It’s also the reward, therefore the motive, for terror, they said. Apart from oil, there isn’t a viable economy in the entire Muslim world. Loyalty is easily purchased when one’s family is starving, the terrorists explained. All of them sang the same song, telling us that the Saudis, the Syrians, the Egyptians, the Iranians, and the Iraqis fund the hatred and violence. First they reward the families of suicide bombers. The Iranians pay $15,000, the Iraqis $25,000, the Syrians $10,000, while the Saudis pay the most, sometimes as much as a million dollars. And then they control the only source of money families have to buy food and keep a roof over their heads. The most moderate terrorists, Fatah and Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, make it clear that they don’t give their money out of kindness. The Muslim leaders want people who are indebted to them, and equipped by them, to terrorize Jews. In other words, the Palestinians have become mercenaries.

On Islamic Terror:

Why do you believe Islam is responsible for terrorism?

Everything points in the same direction. The terrorists themselves told us that virgins in paradise were their reward for murdering us. Their textbooks say the same thing, as do their mullahs, their media, and their scriptures. And in case you haven’t noticed, so do their actions. They are completely open about it. They hate us and want us dead. What’s more, their religion says that’s a good thing. In fact, according to both Allah and Muhammad, it’s the best thing. The only surprise is that our political leaders and our media have overlooked the obvious.

Isn’t your opinion counter to that of every Muslim cleric and most political leaders?

Yes, but it’s not my opinion. It’s fact. Islam is not a tolerant, peace-loving religion. We do not worship the same God. The Qur’an’s most dominant themes are pain, hate, and war. Terror is the legacy of Muhammad because Muhammad himself was a terrorist. While saying that isn’t politically correct, it is correct - and I prove this conclusively in Tea With Terrorists.

How can your view of Islam be right and a billion Muslims be wrong?

If you lived in Stalin’s Soviet Union would you have supported Communism, or would you have spoken out against it? Would you have at least feigned support for Nazism if you lived in Hitler’s Germany? The penalty for speaking out against those violent doctrines was less severe than criticizing Islam or Muhammad - even today. There is no Islamic state with a free press, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, or even freedom of thought. They all imprison, torture, or assassinate anyone who challenges Islam. It’s the chain that binds their citizens. It’s their golden goose.

Are you saying that Muslims are Muslims only because not to be one is lethal?

While that’s true, the real answer is more complicated. The dictatorial thugs who control the Middle Eastern nations, the "tribes with flags," according to Egypt’s foreign minister, are not religious. Yes, I know that Saddam Hussein has traded in his general’s uniform and AK-47 for a tailored business suit and a prayer blankie, but to the faithful there isn’t much of a difference. The nature of Islam allows the dictators to suppress resistance and in effect force their people to serve their interests. "Islam" means submission. The Qur’an requires absolute and unquestioned obedience to king, cleric, and prophet.

What about everyday Muslims? Why are they Muslims if what you say about Islam is true?

The answer is simple. There is no choice. Islamic studies dominate their education. If you can handle the truth, read the excerpts from Arab textbooks we included in the chapter entitled "Bad News," on page 323. The Islamic war manifesto is preached to them in every mosque. Islam’s war against the infidels is the lead story on the state-controlled media outlets. Terrorists are turned into martyrs and idolized. In other words, the citizens of every Islamic state are indoctrinated. They are told what to think, what to believe, what to do.

On Muhammad Being a Terrorist:

In Tea With Terrorists, you say some very unkind things about Muhammad. Why?

His followers are terrorizing the world - killing Americans, Jews, and their own people with reckless abandon. While it saddens me that a billion people have been coerced into trusting a farce, I wouldn’t have troubled myself with exposing it if they weren’t driven to murder.

You call Muhammad a terrorist. Why?

His words and his deeds define him. Islam was a failed religion until Muhammad became a terrorist. By definition a terrorist is someone who targets civilians for the purpose of establishing their own regime. This is precisely what Muhammad did. First he and his followers raided caravans, killing civilians, ransoming some, selling others into slavery, keeping some as sex slaves. Pillaging, taking booty, the spoils of war, became a central pillar in Islam. Killing for Allah became a scriptural mandate.

This image of Muhammad is the antithesis of what Muslims claim. Can you prove it?

They prove it for me. Listen to these verses from their own scriptures. From the Hadith of al-Bukhari, the Book of Jihad, verse 1204: "A man asked Allah’s Messenger, ‘Guide me to a deed that equals Jihad in reward.’ Muhammad replied, ‘There is no such deed.’" Incidentally the professor who translated this volume said: "Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s cause with maximum force and weaponry. It is the most important part of Islam. By Jihad Islam is established, made superior, and propagated. If Jihad is forsaken, Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position. Their honor is lost and their lands are stolen. Their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim." Islam is a war manifesto. From Qur’an, Surah 5:33: "The punishment for those that attack Allah and His Prophet and perpetrate disorders in the land is to kill or crucify them. Such is their disgrace in this world and in the hereafter, their doom shall be dreadful." Or from Qur’an 8:59: "The infidels," defined as Christians in surah 5:72, "should not think that they can get away. Prepare against them whatever arms and cavalry you can muster and strike terror." And from the Hadith, "Muhammad said, ‘Allah guarantees to admit fighters in his cause into paradise if they are killed or Allah will return them home safely with war booty if they survive.’" Or, also from the lips of the peace-loving Prophet, "Allah will endow a person with an understanding of the Qur’an, so that he understands the ransom of blood-money for captives and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel." Islam is a license to kidnap and kill.

Is that where the suicide bombers get their idea of a reward for martyrdom?

There are far more direct verses than that one. For example, from the Hadith: "Allah’s Apostle has ordered us to fight you till you worship Allah alone or pay us a tribute [tax]. Our Prophet informed us that Allah says, ‘Whomever among us is martyred shall go to paradise to lead a luxurious life beyond imagination, and whoever among us survives the battle shall become your master." Or, "I heard the Prophet saying, ‘Jihad will bring about either a reward in the hereafter or booty in this world." How do you lose with a deal like that?

The words you use to describe Muhammad in your book are very mean spirited. Why?

What would you call a 50 year old man who asks his best friend if he can have sexual relations with his 6 year old daughter? Some say that he waited until she was 9 and he was 53, but I think the word pedophile still applies. When you order someone to kill a journalist in her bed surrounded by her children because she wrote something critical, do you suppose assassin is to strong a word? By decapitating Daniel Pearl away from his family, yet still on camera, today’s Muslim terrorists are merely a kinder and gentler version of their Prophet. Muhammad conquered civilian villages and did all of the following things: took the most beautiful women as sex slaves and encouraged his men to do likewise. He had many civilians killed, ransomed others, and sold still others into slavery. He confiscated their possessions and shared the booty with his fellow militants. The proof that he did all of these things proudly and repeatedly can be found in the Qur’an, the Hadith, and in his earliest biography. Therefore, the terms: rapist, kidnapper, slave trader, warmonger, killer, terrorist, and thief are perfectly appropriate.

Are you saying that today’s terrorists are acting just like Muhammad?

Muhammad’s legacy is terror. The Qur’an is a war manifesto. It is more spiteful and racist than Mien Kampf. The demented doctrine that became Islam is as dangerous as was Nazism.

On Hitler-Muhammad, Islam-Nazism Comparisons:

Isn’t your comparison of Muhammad to Hitler, the most maniacal character in modern history, unfair?

Unfair to whom, Hitler or Muhammad? Based upon our research, Muhammad makes Hitler look like a choirboy. In the chapter "Bad Boys," we prove our case. It’s not our opinion that Muhammad and Hitler are similar - it’s a historical fact. Their personalities, careers, books, motives, and methods are virtually identical. And they chose the same enemy - Jews. They both used the peace process to lull other nations to sleep while they prepared for war.

Nazism is an atheistic doctrine and Islam is a religion. How can they be the same?

Nazis idolized Hitler, Communists Mao and Lenin, Muslims Muhammad. Ultimately they used the same tools to indoctrinate and subdue their societies. The result was identical.

You compare Chamberlain’s gift of the Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia to Hitler as if it is analogous to giving Yasser Arafat the West Bank and Gaza in Israel. Is that comparison fair?

The similarities are as striking and as frightening as those between Hitler and Muhammad. Both nations were high-tech and prosperous democracies surrounded by dictatorships. They both had treasonous 20% minority populations that were inflamed by a racially inspired, hateful, and violent doctrine. Both Israel and Czechoslovakia had superior military capability which was, (or will be), rendered useless. Both nations were told by the West that their behavior was an impediment to peace and that if they would just appease the saber-rattling thug and trade land for peace the world would avoid war. The first time we played this game, war broke out two months later and 50 million people died. I don’t want to play it again. Do you?

On Islam:

Haven’t you just pulled a few isolated verses out of context to make Islam look bad?

Since the Qur’an and Hadith are void of context and chronology, that’s impossible. And even if the Islamic scriptures had been composed with an intelligible contextual or chronological order, we quote hundreds of verses in Tea With Terrorists. They are neither few nor isolated. Tell you what, I’ll quote from the Hadith and the Qur’an until you tell me you’re convinced. The first are all quotes directly from Muhammad. "Paradise will be granted to the first of my followers that undertake a naval expedition." "The first army amongst my followers to invade Caesar’s city will be forgiven their sins." "Whomever is wounded in Allah’s cause, his wound will have the smell of musk perfume in paradise." "‘Embrace Islam first and then fight.’ So he became a Muslim and was martyred. Allah’s Apostle said, ‘A little work and a great reward.’" "The angel Gabriel said to the Prophet, ‘Why have you put down your arms? I have not put down mine yet.’ The Prophet said, ‘Where does Allah want me to go?’ ‘This way,’ he answered, pointing to the [Jewish] tribe of Beni Quraidha." So Muhammad laid siege to their village, sold the women and children into slavery and decapitated the men. The peace-loving prophet’s army stole their possession and used the loot to finance their war machine. Sounds an awful lot like Adolph Hitler and the Holocaust. Want some more? "The booty! O people, the booty! Your fellow Muslims have become victorious in the battle. What are you waiting for?" "Allah’s Messenger said, ‘By Allah we will go to the enemy and collect our share from the war booty.’" "The Prophet said, ‘Some of your casualties were mutilated. I did not urge my men to do so, yet I do not feel sorry for what they did.’" In Qur’an 4 Muhammad asks, "O Allah why did you make war compulsory for us?" In the 8th surah Allah says, "O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight." Also from the 8th surah, "If you meet them in battle, inflict on them such a defeat as would be a lesson for those who come after them, that they may be warned." "Fight the unbelievers till all opposition ends and know that one fifth of what you acquire as war booty is for you and Me." "Allah wished to confirm the truth by his words; wipe the [Christian] infidels out to the last."

How many of these rather nasty verses did you say there are?

There are hundreds of quotes from Muhammad in the Hadith as bad or worse. Allah is every bit as mean spirited in the Qur’an. For example, in the Qur’an 47 Allah says, "When you clash with the [Christian] infidels smite their necks until you overpower them, then hold them in bondage...taking a ransom. I could have killed them Myself but I want to test your followers, [Muhammad]. I [Allah] will not allow the deeds of those who are killed in My Cause to go to waste and will admit them into the gardens of paradise." "Woe to those who are skeptical when a surah is revealed mentioning war." "Do not get weak-kneed and sue for peace, for you will have the upper hand." "If you have a treaty with such people, retaliate by breaking it off." "Your Lord sent you from your home to fight." "And Allah said to the angels, ‘I am with you; go and strengthen the faithful. I shall fill the hearts of the infidels with terror. So smite them on their necks and every joint, and incapacitate them, for they opposed Me and Muhammad. Whoever opposes Allah and His Apostle should know that Allah is severe in retribution. The [Christian] infidels will taste the torment of Hell.’" Allah said, "‘It was not you [Muhammad] who killed, but me. You did not throw what you threw. It was me.’" By that logic Allah himself flew the planes into the World Trade Center. Terror is indeed, the legacy of Muhammad.

Are Allah’s angels all killers?

Yes. In surah 8:50, Allah said: "If only you could have seen the infidels as my angels drew away their souls. My angels struck their faces and backs, saying, ‘Taste the torment of burning in Hell.’" "Allah is powerful and severe in His punishment." "We have prepared Hell for the hospitality of the [Christian] infidels."

Allah creating Hell for Christians’ hospitality doesn’t sound particularly merciful or tolerant. Is this theme as prevalent as war and booty?

Pain, punishment, hell, and demons is the Qur’an’s single most prevalent theme. It’s repeated over 1,000 times in a relatively short book - an average of ten times a surah. Let me quote a few examples, all from the Qur’an. "Allah cursed the [Christian] infidels and prepared a blazing fire for them. They will live forever in it and will find no savior." "Their faces will be turned on the fire as if they were on a spit." "‘O Allah,’ Muhammad pleaded, ‘give them a double dose of punishment and put a grievous curse upon them." "Their requital will be Hell because they disbelieved and mocked My signs and My Messenger." "There will be boiling water for them, and cold clammy, fetid drink to taste, and other similar torments. They will roast in fire." "They will wear iron collars and chains around their necks, they will be dragged through boiling water, and then burnt." "The food of sinners in Hell is like pitch. It will fume in the belly, as does boiling water, cutting their intestines to shreds." "Seize them and drag them into the depths of Hell," Allah says. "Then pour the torment of scalding water over their heads. Taste it!" Sure sounds peace-loving and tolerant to me.

You speak of the Qur’an’s fascination with hell and demons. Does the Qur’an mention Satan and do you think the Islam is Satanic as other Christians have claimed?

Yes and no. Satan has a far more impressive role in the Qur’an than he does in the Bible. And according to Muhammad’s Allah, Satan and his demons love the Qur’an. Read surah 46:29. But no, Satan didn’t invent Islam, nor did he write the Qur’an. He’s too smart for that. If Satan had been involved, the Qur’an would have made sense as would have Islam. But I agree with Allah on one thing, Satan loves it.

Allah seems to have a rather vivid imagination. How does he describe heaven?

It’s a drunken orgy. Every guy gets two perpetual virgins and all the booze he can drink. Unless he dies a martyr, bombing our buildings and killing innocents. Islam loves murderers. They get seventy virgins and perpetual erections (or state of readiness).

And women, what do they get?

According to Muhammad in the Hadith, it’s ugly. Quoting from the Book of Belief, Chapter 17, verse 27: "The Prophet Muhammad said, ‘I was shown the Hell Fire and the majority of its dwellers were women who are disbelievers or ungrateful.’ It was asked, ‘Do they disbelieve in Allah or are they ungrateful?’ He replied, ‘They are ungrateful to their husbands for the favors and charitable deeds they have done for them.’" Now you know why they don’t complain.

You said that there were a thousand repetitions in the Qur’an regarding punishment. Are there any other repeated themes?

There are 37 creation accounts and 22 conflicting variations. The stories of Pharaoh being cursed because he didn’t listen to Allah’s messenger Moses, Sodom getting pummeled because they didn’t listen to Allah’s messenger Lot, and everybody drowning because they didn’t heed Allah’s messenger Noah, are repeated 20 to 70 times each. And each time the actual Biblical account is twisted with a purpose. The Qur’an’s second most prevalent theme is that Allah is going to punish everyone who does not listen to his Messenger Muhammad. This is repeated some 400 times and the versions are highly entertaining. The discussion begins on page 588.

What do Allah and Muhammad have to say about people like you that mock them?

They call us: "liars, losers, evil, vile, lost, deaf, dumb, blind, dead, vain, conceited, shameful, sinful, slime, subversive, slanderers, hypocrites, insane, wicked, ignoramuses, conspirators, deceivers, malicious, oblivious annoyances." When he really gets miffed he calls his critics mischief mongers, faggots, apes, nail biters, donkeys, and tongue twisters." Every last one of these adjectives is used in the Qur’an by Allah to describe Christians and Jews.

Why would Allah use such derogatory terms to describe Christians and Jews?

Now that gets to the heart of the matter. Muhammad based Islam on the Bible, but being illiterate he fouled up every account. He even claims repeatedly in the Qur’an that Moses’ Torah and Jesus’ Gospels are inspired, Allah’s word. But the Jews and Christians at the time, knowing right from wrong, truth from fiction, exposed Muhammad for the fraud he was. This gave rise to Muhammad’s hatred for Christians and Jews; it became his preoccupation and ultimately brought us to the place we are today - with Muslim terrorists killing us in the name of Allah.

Can you quote a specific example of Christians and Jews calling Muhammad a fraud or of Muhammad’s rage stemming from such verbal abuse?

All of the following quotes are directly out of the Qur’an. "Muhammad is a deceiving sorcerer, turning many gods into one deity." "There must be a motive behind the Qur’an. It is surely a fabrication." "They laugh at the Qur’an and say, ‘Should we abandon our gods for the sake of an insane poet?’" "Allah has not sent down anything. You are only speaking lies." "We feel you augur ill, [Muhammad]. If you do not desist, we shall stone you to death, and inflict a grievous punishment on you." "This is nothing but a man who wants to turn you away from what your fathers used to worship. This is nothing but a fabricated lie, nothing but pure sorcery." "The Qur’an is nothing but earlier peoples’ lore. These are fables of antiquity which he has reinvented." " He has forged the Qur’an." "These are only confused dreams. He has invented them. Let him bring a miracle like the other prophets did." "For those that speak ill of the Prophet and offend Allah’s Apostle there is a painful punishment. Have they not realized that anyone who opposes Allah and His Prophet will abide in Hell forever?" Those who knew Muhammad best knew he was a conman.

You said that the Qur’an claims that the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Gospels were all from Allah. How is that possible if they are so different?

It isn’t possible. One speaks of a God of love, the other of lust. One says don’t commit murder. The other claims paradise awaits those who murder. One God teaches us not to lie; the other encourages it. One says turn the other cheek; the other orders his followers to slice it off. One wants us to love, the other to fight. Muhammad put Islam in a no-win position. If the Bible is inspired by God as he claims, then Islam is a fraud because the Qur’an is entirely different. If the Bible isn’t inspired then Islam is a fraud because the Qur’an says it is.

Don’t Muslims claim that the Judeo-Christian scriptures were altered and that Muhammad was only correcting them?

Yes, but that’s insane. To say that the people who lived the stories, performed the miracles, and recorded them dutifully for posterity got it wrong and the illiterate Arab a score of centuries and a thousand miles removed got them right is absurd. But the proof is the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls. They prove that Biblical scriptures haven’t changed over the millennia.

Why do you think Islam is a fraud?

Terrorists don’t made good prophets. Muhammad’s life was so hellish, his character was so evil, there’s no chance he could have told anyone the way to heaven. Second, Islam condemns itself when Allah says that he inspired the Torah, the Gospels, and the Qur’an. Yet the god of Islam and the path to him are radically different from the God and path presented in Judeo-Christianity. Third, since Muhammad based the Qur’an on the Bible, and since his version is different, one of the two must be untrue. Since the original is detailed and validated in a historical context and the other isn’t even chronological, and since one was written by the Jewish eyewitness to the godly events, prophecies, and miracles and the other was recounted by an illiterate Arab, an enemy of the Jews, who did none of these things, it isn’t hard to determine which one isn’t telling the truth. Fourth, the Qur’an is laughably contradictory. And fifth, there is no chance that goodness, truth, god, and heaven are as Muhammad described them. I could go on for hours and talk about how Allah was simply the moon god promoted to supreme deity, or the nature of the pagan Ka’aba being transformed into a monotheistic shrine. But the words, deeds, and life of Muhammad are sufficient to convince anyone that Islam is a fraud.

Why are there so many Muslims if Islam is so easily disproved?

The older generation of Muslims simply don’t know any better. In a way they’re like the Catholics in the Dark and Middle Ages. There is lots of ritual, lots of being told what to think, but very little information. Not only are Muslims ordered to submit rather than think, thinkers are killed. Any rational person given the information in our book will flee from Islam. Now as for the younger generation, it’s an entirely different story. They have been indoctrinated from birth by a collusion of sources. Pure, fundamental, racist, hateful, and violent Islam is what they learn in school, what they hear in the mosques, what they see in the media, and what they’re told by their dictators. Our money, oil money, has taught a generation to hate us.

Isn’t there anything in the Islamic scriptures that you find redeeming? It can’t all be bad?

For a lie to sell it has to be imbued with enough truth to appear credible. Islam’s credibility comes entirely from the Judeo-Christian scriptures. If you didn’t know the truth, Muhammad’s convoluted version might seem almost rational. Unfortunately, the rest of what Allah has to say is pure garbage. The Qur’an is the worst book I have ever read. First, it’s plagiarized. Second, it’s out of order. There is no chronological context rendering many of Muhammad’s rantings gibberish. Allah’s schizophrenic, speaking in first, second, and third person, singular and plural. It’s so contradictory that even they make excuses for it. Allah says, "Whenever we come up with a different verse, or a better one, we cast the old one into oblivion." And the subject matter is ugly: hating, fighting, terrorizing, and gratifying lustful desires.

Tea With Terrorists has some rather entertaining scriptures. Why embarrass Islam?

It embarrasses itself. You’ll find my favorites in "Moon God" beginning on page 245, a second batch starting on page 554 at the end of "Pressed," and another hilarious segment on page 588. As for why: Muslims are killing Christians and Jews, Americans and Israelis. I went into this assignment expecting to find some flaw in Islam, or in the interpretation of Islam, that caused a percentage of Muslims to act militantly. That’s obviously not what I found. Islam is the root cause of terror. The terrorists have not corrupted their religion. The doctrine itself is demented.

You call the third holiest site in the Muslim world, the Dome of the Rock on the Temple Mount, the Dome of the Hoofie Print. That doesn’t sound like you’re trying to win friends?

The Dome is a political symbol, not a religious shrine. It was built purposefully right on top of the Jews’ only holy site just to spite them. Now Muslims, to their shame, say it’s there because Muhammad flew to Jerusalem one night from Mecca and then went on to heaven. But ask yourself this: why would the founder of Islam leave his holiest site, the Ka’aba, where he was at the time, and fly to the holiest site of the hated Jews, to get to heaven.

You can’t say that all of Muhammad’s influence was evil. What about their golden age?

The Islamic golden age followed their bloody conquests and preceded reliable information on the message and the Messenger. We discuss why Muslims went from violent to peaceful and then back to violent on page 459.

On the Palestinians:

Mr. Winn you say some very injurious things about the Palestinians. Why?

They earned it. Let me share some things from their history they don’t want you to know...

Are you a proponent of the peace process?

No. The peace process is the most direct path to war. If the West Bank and Gaza are given to the so-called Palestinians, Muslim passions will be inflamed, not satiated, and this in turn will lead, as it did in the 1930s, to war. Let me explain...

Yasser Arafat has won a Nobel Peace Prize. Why do you treat him like a common terrorist?

I don’t. He’s an extraordinarily good terrorist - maybe the best in the world. We are very complimentary. He knows who he is. He likes being a terrorist. Let me provide a little background on Chairman Arafat including the eulogy we wrote for him on page 461...

Isn’t Chairman Arafat the popularly elected leader of the Palestinian people?

That’s like saying that Stalin, Mao, and that nutcase Communist dictator in North Korea were popularly elected. The PA is a one-party system, just like every Islamic and Communist nation. The party is Fatah. Arafat is the founder and chairman. Every PA minister, government official, policeman, judge, and military officer is a member of Fatah. Sure, there are some other parties - Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, to name a few - but they all stay out of politics. They’re full-time terrorists. Arafat ran against a 70 year old woman social worker last election and he still only got 87% of the vote.

You claim that the occupied territories aren’t "occupied." Why?

They used to be occupied, but now they’re just terrorized. After the UN established the nation of Israel in 1948, Gaza was conquered and occupied by the Egyptians. The West Bank was conquered and occupied by the Jordanians. Neither saw the Arabs living there as Palestinians and neither had any interest in giving them autonomy - much less a Palestinian state. When these and other nations massed their armies on Israel’s borders with the express intent of finishing what Hitler started, they lost. Israel reclaimed the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. They were hers and they are hers. In fact, our claims to Texas and California are weaker than the Israeli’s claims to the West Bank and Gaza.

What about the poor Palestinian people, the millions of refugees?

In 1948, when Israel was awarded two-tenths of one percent as much land as was given to the Arabs, that was considered far too generous by the we-hate-Jews community, so they declared war. The Secretary General of the Arab League told Muslims living in Israel to leave so his armies could slaughter Jews more freely. In his words, "We will annihilate the Jews in a massacre comparable to the crusades." But they lost that war. So calling the Arabs who fled, who are now in their late seventies, "refugees" because they moved out to make it easier for their brethren to kill Jews, is macabre.

The moderate Arab nations are telling us that before they’ll support an invasion of Iraq we must deal with the Palestinian refugees and give them a homeland. Why not?

Let me share an important quote from a distinguished source. In 1949 the United Nations established UNRWA as a provisional body to provide relief for the Palestinian refuges. The agency’s director, Ralph Garroway said, "The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the UN, and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don’t give a damn whether the refugees live or die." If that’s not enough, how about this one from the Saudi ruling family’s favorite sheik? At the state-sponsored fundraiser to reward the good work the Palestinian suicide bombers were doing killing Jews, Buraik said, "I am against America. My hatred of America, if part of it was contained in the universe, would cause it to collapse. She is the root of all evils and wickedness on earth. O, Muslims, don’t take the Jews and Christians as allies. Muslim brothers in Palestine, do not have any mercy neither compassion, on the Jews, their blood, their money, their flesh. Their women are yours to take, legitimately. Allah made them yours. Why don’t you enslave their women?" Why don’t you wage jihad? Why don’t you pillage them?" All inspired by the Qur’an.

In Tea With Terrorists you say that there is no Palestine and no Palestinians. Why?

Because it’s true. Over the next minute or two I’ll expose the second most deadly lie of our times. You’ll find the book’s explanation on pages 388 and 472... Ultimately, the agenda of much of the Muslim world is dependant on you being deceived by this very lie.

Why is the Palestinian lie the second most important? What is the most important lie?

Islam is a peace-loving religion. Nothing could be further from the truth. Islam is a warlike and repressive doctrine, bent on nothing short of world conquest. The Nation of Islam, lands already controlled by Muslims, are know as the "House of Peace," or dar us-Salam. Everything else is called the "House of War," dar us-Harb. A state of Islamic war shall exist until the House of Peace lays siege and conquers the House of War.

Where does Israel fit into this? What is so bad about giving the Palestinians a homeland in the "occupied territories?"

Israel is ground zero in the war against terrorism. There are more terrorists, and terrorist events, per capita there than anywhere. And as with Czechoslovakia in 1938, giving in to the violent thugs will inspire them just as surely as Chamberlain’s appeasement rallied the Nazis around Hitler. It was a "land-for-peace process" that within 60 days led to world war. In more human terms, we cover this same ground in the chapter called "Pressed" on page 537.

You speak of the Palestinian Authority as if it were a terrorist organization. Why?

Lets begin with its heritage: the PLO on page 462... Fatah on page 381... The Jordanian uprising on page 300... The Lebanese Civil War... The PA after Oslo from page 526...

In the chapter "Moon God" you speak of a meeting with a PA minister. Did that meeting actually occur, and did you accurately report what he said?

Yes, verbatim, starting on page 260. It opened our eyes. Not only is awarding the Palestinians a state bad for Israel, it’s not even in the Palestinians’ interest. I’ll explain why...

On the Solution to Terror:

How can we bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians?

Separate the warring children. If the Arabs living in Israel think they’re "Palestinians," give them the land of the Philistines, from which the name was derived: Gaza. You’d be following the example set by Muhammad, so the Muslims can’t squawk. And since Allah claims He inspired the Torah, Arabs are further silenced because the Author of the Torah was very specific as to where he wanted Jews and Arabs. Nor can the Middle East dictators cry foul, because it’s how they treated the Jews in 1948. The Egyptians, Syrians, and Jordanians would also be silenced by the fact that all of them terrorized the so-called Palestinians.

Doesn’t a racially-based exodus fly in the face of international law?

No. That’s precisely what happened in the period between the two World Wars. The British drew lines in the sand and rewarded the warlords the fought against their brethren with states. These nations were based upon clans and tribes. The Jews were shortchanged, that’s all. It makes absolutely no sense to have an infinitesimally small country give up land for the promise of peace. Especially when the promise is made by Muslims. They were told by their prophet to lie. They were ordered to kill Jews. Their Prophet said, "War is deceit." And most importantly, Allah told them that treaties with non-Muslims were non-binding. He even told them to promise us "peace" until it was too late.

How would you implement your initiative?

I would give Arabs living in Israel a choice. They can choose to live in the freest, most prosperous, and just country in the Middle East or they can choose autonomy and live in virtual slavery like every other Arab. But if they choose the freedom, prosperity, and justice of Israel, they may neither vote nor commit acts of treason, including terror. For those who want to live like the rest of the Arab world, it’s a one-way ticket to an enlarged Gaza strip. I’d make Gaza twenty to thirty miles wide with the border between Israel and Egypt as its centerline. On the diagonal moving southeast, the state of Palestine could go half the distance or more toward Eliat. Then for a whole lot less money than is currently being wasted in the Middle East, I’d install desalinization plants like those in Saudi Arabia. Invest $30 billion in housing and infrastructure. That’s $10,000 a person - nearly a $100,000 a family. Under Habitat for Humanity’s management 20% would go to housing and the remainder to infrastructure and productive enterprise.

What if the Palestinians don’t like either of your options?

After 50 years of refugee status, principally because even their own don’t want them, 50 years of war and terror, I think they’ve overstayed their welcome. They no longer deserve a choice. Move them gently and kindly, but move them.

Your Palestinian solution isn’t going to satisfy even the most moderate Arab nations?

Yes. And that’s because no dictator has ever been satiated. You could give Israel to the Arabs and kill every Jew and they would still be terrorists.

In Tea With Terrorists you propose a plan for the rest of the Arab world. Is it feasible?

It’s extreme, but not as extreme as not doing it. We have a simple choice. We can put an end to terror now in Arabia before they have nuclear weapons or we can fight them here in America after they get them. Based upon their history, rhetoric, and religion, you know they’ll use them.

The cost of your plan would be prohibitive both in money and lives?

First, America wouldn’t pay for it. Rather than oil money going to make terrorists, I’d use it to put them out of business. And remember, in 1991, when Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world, we destroyed their ability to fight with minimal loss of life.

What gives us the right to attack a nation that hasn’t attacked us?

What do you call the Black Hawk bloodbath in Mogadishu? The demolished barracks in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia? The USS Cole? PanAm 103? The Pentagon and World Trade Center? Shouldn’t we defend ourselves like we did following the bombing of Pearl Harbor?

Japan was a nation. The terrorists come from many nations so it’s not the same thing?

Yes it is. The Muslims who attacked us call themselves the Nation of Islam. They are at war with us. And they will continue to attack until we are either destroyed or we surrender.

You advocate using a version of the MacArthur plan on the Arabs. What gives us the right to impose our values on them?

The same thing that gave us the right to impose our values on the Japanese and the Germans after World War II. And while it was good for us, turning foes into friends and great trading partners, it was even better for them. Let’s face facts. The living conditions in the Muslim world are among the worst on earth. Let’s give them something to live for rather than die for.

It sounds like you want to massacre Muslims. Is your plan any different than the Crusades?

Islam is our enemy, the enemy of all civilized and peace-loving peoples. I don’t want to kill Muslims, I want to free them from this dreadful and violent deception. The world became a vastly safer place when we diminished the influence of emperor and warlord worship in Japan, Nazism in Germany, and Communism in Russia. And while everyone won, the biggest winners were the citizens of the countries that had harbored the dictatorial megalomaniacs.

How can America go to war against a billion people?

We don’t have to. But we must come to grips with the root cause of terror, understand how it propagates itself, and then eradicate it intelligently. It’s money, to madrases, to murder. Thus in the first phase we need to make oil money work for us, not against us. To do that we will need to disarm and disengage the dictators in Saudi, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Libya. Then just as in Japan, Germany, and Russia, when non-compliance is no longer lethal, and money, the mother’s milk of terror, is withheld, support will decline. Our defensive strategy would be against tens of thousands, not millions, and certainly not a billion.

Are you willing to kill tens of thousands to impose Western mores on Muslims?

I am not opposed to killing those who are devoted to killing innocents. For example, if I could have killed the thousands of people responsible for the 9/11 suicide bombers, those that recruited them, preached to them, taught them, inspired them, financed them, and harbored them, I would have done so without regret. I am sure there are tens of thousands of Muslim who have been indoctrinated beyond salvation. Killing them is a win-win proposition. They get an express ticket to Allah, and countless innocent lives are spared in the process.

In Tea With Terrorists you speak of a collusion of Muslim forces. What are these?

The mega-rich are financing a delusional, racist, and violent doctrine. The mullahs in the mosques are preaching this delusional, racist, and violent doctrine. The public schools and private madrases are teaching the delusional, racist, and violent doctrine. The state-controlled media outlets are spewing this delusional, racist, and violent doctrine. The maniacal dictators are enforcing the same delusional, racist, and violent doctrine. Under the status quo there is no place for truth to seep in. And time will only make things worse.

Why does time work against us?

America’s current oil appetite causes a half billion dollars a day to be transferred from the victims of Islamic terror to the perpetrators of Islamic terror. At that rate, how much longer before they finish acquiring the means to build and launch nuclear bombs? The CIA believes that thanks to the current Communists North Korea and China and the former Communists in Russia, the Iranians are within a year of having the magic combination of missiles capable of reaching America and nuclear explosives to set on top of them. The Iraqis are three to five years out. The Muslim Pakistanis already have nukes, and thanks to Bush’s war on terrorism, al-Qaeda has been pushed across the border, where they lost no time destabilizing the region. Best laid plans... Oh, and don’t let me forget to thank the French. They built the nuclear reactor in Pakistan that provided the weapons-grade Plutonium and Uranium 235. They also built the reactors in Iran and Iraq. If you don’t think that was stupid, ask yourself this question: "Why would nations that float on oil need nukes to boil water?"

Why is stopping the flow of oil money so important to stopping Islamic terror?

Oil money funds the schools, both public and private, that manufacture terrorists - indoctrinating generations of young people beyond hope. Money funds the state-controlled media outlets that turn murderers into martyrs - making them celebrities worthy of worship. Money builds the mosques and pays the mullahs that preach this deadly doctrine - turning men into submissive instruments of their will. And as we learned talking with the terrorists, money buys allegiance - like-minded mercenaries.

Why isn’t the Bush Administration pointing the finger at Islam?

Oil holds us hostage. Bush, like presidents before him, is blackmailed into supporting a deception that will ultimately kill us. The evidence condemning Islam is both accessible and overwhelming. Thus the only rational explanation for his irrational behavior is blackmail.

On the Bible:

Why did you feel it was necessary to include the Old Testament prophecies?

Muslims claim that the Qur’an was inspired by Allah, yet provide no evidence for its inspiration. The Bible, on the other hand, is a rich repository of irrefutable proof. We use the Messianic prophecies to demonstrate that the odds against Jesus fulfilling the predictions that were made regarding the Messiah’s birth, life, mission, words, sacrifice, and resurrection, are an astonishing ten to the 65th power, and we only hit the high spots. We use prophecy as it was intended, to prove the Bible’s divine inspiration. The Qur’an contains no such confirmation of its inspiration. There are no prophecies, no miracles, no original stories, just hate.

Why did you dedicate the chapter, "Leap of Faith" to the last 24 hours of Jesus’ life?

Once we discovered how troubling Islam was, I became concerned that an agnostic who read our book would become an atheist if he didn’t have a rational alternative. Second, because Jesus’ words and the way he responded to his tormentors was so godly compared to Muhammad’s, we thought the comparison would help readers understand why we were so critical of Islam. And truthfully, until you understand the Bible you’ll never understand Muhammad, or the source of Islamic rage.

Does the Qur’an talk about Jesus?

Yes, and Allah’s claims regarding Jesus prove beyond any doubt that Islam is a farce. For example, Allah says that Jesus, unlike Muhammad, was virgin born, and that He breathed life into him in the same way he made Adam. Allah claims that Jesus spoke of his resurrection while in the cradle, although Islam’s god says Jesus was not crucified. Allah specifically calls Jesus "Christ," which means Messiah, but over fifty times in the Qur’an Allah claims that Jesus was nothing more than a second-rate messenger. The Gospels, Allah says, are His inspired word, but then Allah claims the Jesus will ignore them and judge by the laws of the Qur’an. But mostly Allah just condemns Jesus and his message.

In Tea With Terrorists you say that it is impossible to understand terror apart from the Qur’an and that it is equally impossible to understand the Qur’an apart from the Bible. Why?

Muhammad based his new "religion" on the Bible. When he twisted the Biblical accounts to serve his interests, the Jews in Yathrib, today’s Medina, mocked him. This enraged Muhammad and caused him to migrate from a wannabe Jew to a genocidal Arab. It was the birth of Jihad, the first Holocaust.

On American Politics:

In Tea With Terrorists you are extremely critical of Homeland Security. Why?

Fighting Islamic terror here is impossible. Fighting it where it breeds is possible. With homeland security we punish the victims and reward the villains. We live in the freest country on earth. The things we could do to make us marginally safer, we won’t do: profiling, rational immigration, utilization of our armed services domestically. And the things we have done are worse than useless. They make us no safer yet they burden our economy and restrict our citizens.

Why bring up American politics? Why do you have a liberal vs. conservative discussion?

Ending terrorism requires a four part plan. First, we must come to know who the terrorists really are and why they kill. Second, we must stop rewarding them and encouraging them. Third, America needs to become stronger so that, fourth, we can save the world from this disease. The liberal vs. conservative discussion was critical to phase three. And, a comparison of dictatorial Islamic states to other nations in which government is used liberally was important in phase one - understanding our enemy.

Radical Muslim
Radical Muslim