Travel Ban Not a Solution to Terror Threat

28 02 2017

by Harun Yahya

President Trump concentrated his pre-electoral promises and statements on certain key topics. The most prominent ones among these topics were the issues about immigrants, war on radicalism and new international economic measures aimed at protecting the America’s economic interests.

Among these, the executive order implemented the fastest by Mr. Trump after taking office was to ban the entry of refugees and various Muslim nationals to the US. Under the Executive Order, which has been dubbed a “Muslim Ban” by anti-Trump circles, the US refugee admission system has been suspended for 120 days; the Syrian refugee program has been indefinitely discontinued; the citizens of 7 Muslims countries consisting Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia and Sudan have been banned for 90 days from entering the United States.

The order, which has sparked widespread reactions and protests within and outside the United States, has placed many Muslims with valid official visas, even residence permits who come to the US to study, work, visit their relatives, or receive treatment for various illnesses in an exceedingly difficult position. In fact, when the order was issued, many among them were flying on their way to the US, unaware of the unfolding events.

The order brought with it contradictions and uncertainties. For example, those who are citizens of the 7 countries but also hold dual passports from countries such as France, Canada and Britain were also included in the ban. On the other hand, the Department of Homeland Security announced that those who have permanent residence permits and pose no serious threat to the US would be allowed in on a case-by-case basis. However, it remains unclear whether this would extend to those in possession of work or student visas.

It is clear that, other than causing grief to innocent harmless Muslims, the order, which was issued on the grounds of establishing security measures against terrorism, will be of no avail to the safety of the country or the image of the new administration. Welcoming refugees is a crucial part of what America represents and values, a part of the American Dream that Trump promises to revive. Since the 2nd World War, the US has been the world’s leader in resettling refugees. Half of the refugees who are permanently resettled in a third country resettled in the US. Since the Refugee Act of 1980, the federal government has suspended refugee admissions only once before: in the aftermath of September 11, 2001, to December 11, 2001. The executive order presumes that the US needs to take longer reviewing refugee procedures in 2017 than it did after 9/11.

Amongst the terrorist activities carried out in Western countries, many terrorist organizations employ the members they have recruited from among the citizens of those countries. Lately, the terrorists who carry out acts of terrorism in Europe or the US are found to carry the passports of those countries. For example, the terrorists who perpetrated the Paris attacks in December 2015 and killed 132 people were in possession of French and Belgian passports.

Furthermore, those coming from these 7 countries obtained their visas or permanent residency rights only after going through extensive inspections, psychological tests and interviews, and thorough investigations on their entire backgrounds, activities, connections and social circles. Those who do not meet the required criteria or arouse even the slightest suspicion cannot obtain a visa in the first place. For this reason, trying to get a visa from these countries is a method no terrorist would follow.

Radicalism, as pointed out by President Trump, indeed poses a serious threat for the US, Islamic countries and the entire world. However, it is quite unlikely that this order, signed out of concern for urgently implementing the election promises, will offer a solution to the said threat.

On the contrary, such a practice will only please the deep state elements who are dissatisfied with the new administration. It will present a significant leverage to the provocateurs of the “deep” global anti-Trump campaign, lying in ambush for the opportunity of finding a flaw. The fact that the circles who previously did not voice any criticism against the Muslim massacre in the Middle East, or may even have supported it, now supposedly look out for Muslims merely for the sake of opposing Trump is a clear indication of this.

Furthermore, it should not be forgotten that such policies fuel the feelings of anger, hatred and vengeance, as well as nurture the radical elements who look for an opportunity to attract new recruits to their ranks from among the 3.3 million Muslims in the country.

Therefore, it’s best to not insist on such an erroneous and unfruitful practice that is far from being effective and realistic while having so many negative outcomes. Even if it is impossible to fully reverse the order, it is necessary to make adjustments that will at least reduce the grievances and minimize the ban periods urgently.

Radicalism is a deviant ideology that emerges in the name of Islam but completely contradicts the spirit and tenets of the Qur’an, the one and true source of Islam. Thus, before all else, it is of utmost importance to make a distinction between radicalism and the true Islam that is based on the Qur’an.

If President Trump wishes to eliminate radicalism as he has promised, this can only be achieved through an ideological and scientific struggle. The powerful, real, and truthful  ideas of the Qur’an will undoubtedly eradicate the false and hypocritical message that terrorists use to justify their violent acts.  It has been proven countless times by experience that, contrary to expectations, erroneous policies of violence and military methods provide terrorist structures with ever greater grounds for justification of their cause and a larger number of followers.

For that reason, the Muslim community in the US and around the world should be made aware of the truth of Islam and the deviancy of radicalism in the light of Qur’anic and rational evidence. A broad and extensive worldwide education campaign will deal the most devastating blow to radicalism and eradicate the terrorists’ deviant ideology altogether. It is high time for the world and for President Trump to realize that this is the only way out.


The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and

Syria’s Territorial Integrity Is Important

18 02 2017



by Harun Yahya

In the coming days, there will be two important meetings, 15 days apart, regarding the future of Syria. In the first of these meetings, the parties will meet in Astana, Kazakhstan’s capital city, tomorrow, under the leadership of Turkey and Russia, who played a major role in the ceasefire. Then on February 8, the Geneva Conference will take place under the leadership of the United Nations. This will be the fourth round of the meetings that took place in 2012, 2014 and 2016.

The main agenda of both meetings will be to develop a common roadmap for a lasting peace in the country. After a lasting peace is established, the reconstruction of Syria’s administration and its infrastructure will be planned. Two parties – who have been fighting with each other for six years – uniting under one administration stand out as an important problem. But for the future of the Middle East and in the big picture, the Islamic world, the preservation of the territorial integrity of Syria is very important.

Recently, maps dividing the Middle East are being presented in the international media one after the other. New political maps are being engineered in some circles. These new maps will affect 19 Islamic countries from Libya to Pakistan and about 650mn Muslims living in these countries. The goal is to materialise the bloody scenario that some deep-seated powers planned, especially for the Middle East, and to make the world a more dangerous place by dividing the Muslim countries once again. The plan is aimed at launching new civil wars that will last for decades. This insidious plan must be prevented. The Islamic world does not need new conflicts, new divisions and new disagreements.  It is time to increase our common ground and unite.

The first of the fragmented Middle East maps was drawn by the British historian Bernard Lewis after the Cold War. The updated version appeared in 2006 carrying US intelligence officer Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters’ signature. Then, in January 2008, with Jeffrey Goldberg’s article in the Atlantic Monthly magazine and a report by Kenneth Katzman presented to the American Congress on September 25, 2008 two new maps appeared. To date, many different “New Middle East Maps” have been published in the Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic, the BBC, the New York Times, Pakistan Defense, Washington Post, Reuters, and Huffington Post.

In these maps, think tanks or media outlets have drawn new borders in parallel with the political or economic interests of the centres they represent. Although there were partial differences between these borders that were drawn on a table, they all had something in common. Their aim was to establish 15 new small states in the Middle East, North Africa and West Asia by destroying today’s Muslim states. The real life applications of these maps can be seen in Yemen, Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan today. The Islamic world should stand in a state of collective opposition to these divisive policies. Thus, the forthcoming Syria peace talks will be a very suitable point of resistance in this respect.

Participants in Astana particularly emphasised the importance of preserving the integrity of Syria during the Moscow talks. Russia and Turkey have repeatedly pointed out to the dangers of partition and stated that the main purpose of the meeting in Astana is a solution that will prevent the fragmentation of the country. This emphasis is not only important for Syria, but also for the future of the region.

Turkey is undoubtedly one of the countries which should have the most say regarding Syria. YPG/PKK members from Syria took part in many terrorist acts that took place on Turkish soil in 2016. Also, the weapons the US sent to the YPG are being used by the PKK against Turkey. Three million Syrian refugees live in Turkey. The Turkish government has spent close to $20bn over the course of five years for its guests.

Turkey and Syria share a 650km border, so the security of the other side of the border is synonymous with the security of Turkey. It is absolutely unacceptable for us to let the Stalinist PKK constitute a threat for both Syria and Turkey by forming cantons beyond the border. Both the Syrian regime and the opposition already share this concern of Turkey.

At this stage, many regional states are ready to commit to the task of guarantorship in Syria and to make sacrifices for the reconstruction of Syria. This is the first time a lasting peace has come so close in Syria, even if some circles do not want it. The Syrian peace will also have a positive effect on those Muslim territories where civil war still rages on. Muslims will show that they can live in peace to the whole world and “The Clash of Civilizations” or “Age of Muslim Wars” projects of warmongers such as Samuel Huntington will prove to be futile.

There is not much opportunity left to stop the bloodshed in the Muslim world and this opportunity should not be wasted. This is what the oppressed people surrounded by fire in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Libya are hoping for.  The spirit of brotherhood should reign over the Syria talks. The establishment of peace in Syria is in favour of all Muslims whether they participate in the talks or not.

The Islamic world should be at the forefront in the race for civilisation. Bringing peace back among the Muslims will be the first step in bringing Islamic civilisation to the point it deserves. This is a goal all Muslims should strive to achieve in unison.


The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and

Darwinism Is a Superstitous Belief That Disparages Women

7 02 2017


by Harun Yahya

The alleged scientific support that Social Darwinism provided for racism, fascism and imperialism, as well as communism, is a widely known subject that has been much written about. But one lesser known fact is that a great many Darwinists, including Charles Darwin himself, have believed in the fallacy  that women are both biologically and mentally inferior to men.

As the evolutionist scientist John R. Durant also acknowledges, racism and sexual discrimination are the two main consequences of the theory of evolution. Durant verbalized the fallaciousness in Darwin’s stance regarding women as follows:

… Darwin extended this placement by analogy to include not only children and congenital idiots but also women, some of whose powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation were “characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilization.”[i]

The errors made by Darwin that Durant referred to appear in The Descent of Man, as follows:

It is generally admitted that with women the powers of intuition, of rapid perception, and perhaps of imitation, are more strikingly marked than in man; but some, at least, of these faculties are characteristic of the lower races, and therefore of a past and lower state of civilisation. [ii]

It is clearly obvious that Darwin looked down on women even while he explains why marriage is useful:

… children—constant companion, (friend in old age) who will feel interested in one, object to be beloved and played with—better than a dog anyhow—Home, and someone to take care of house—Charms of music and female chit-chat. These things good for one’s health.[iii]

Darwin states that he – in his twisted way – regards marriage as necessary using the reasoning which predicates that “a woman’s friendship is better than a dog’s,”  yet his statements about marriage made no reference at all to features such as friendship, affection, love, devotion, loyalty, closeness, sincerity and trust between two people who spend their lives together. About marriage, Darwin also had this to say:

… loss of time—cannot read in the evenings—fatness and idleness—anxiety and responsibility—less money for books, etc.,—if many children, forced to gain one’s bread … perhaps my wife won’t like London; then the sentence is banishment and degradation with indolent idle fool. [iv]

In The Descent of Man, Darwin also claims that men are superior to women:

The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man’s attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can women—whether requiring deep thought, reason, or imagination, or merely the use of the senses and hands. If two lists were made of the most eminent men and women in poetry, painting, sculpture, music, … history, science, and philosophy … the two lists would not bear comparison. We may also infer, from the law of the deviation from averages, so well illustrated by Mr. Galton, in his work on “Hereditary Genius” that if men are capable of a decided pre-eminence over women in many subjects, the average of mental power in man must be above that of women. [v]

Of course, all of Darwin’s negative opinions regarding women and the misogynistic discourses of some other Darwinists, the samples of which will be given as we proceed, are diametrically opposed to the moral values described in the Qur’an. In the Qur’an, God commands us to be very compassionate, respectful and protective towards women. Furthermore, He cites women with superior morality such as Mary and the wife of the Pharoah as role models.  Superiority in the Sight of God is not according to one’s race, gender or rank but according to their closeness to God and their faith. In many verses of the Qur’an God informs us that all those who believe- without any discrimination between man and woman- will be rewarded with what they have done:

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of what they did. (Surat An-Nahl, 97)

Examples of the nonsensical remarks of Darwinism regarding women

Darwin’s misogynistic statements are very clear and many scientists are well aware of this fact. Dr. Jerry Bergman, who is against the evolution theory and who explains the negative impacts of Darwinism on social life in his more than 800 published works and more than 20 books, says the following in his book titled The Dark Side of Charles Darwin:

Darwin himself concluded that the differences between human males and females were so large that it was surprising “such different beings belong to the same species” and that “even greater differences” had not evolved. Natural and sexual selection were at the core of Darwinism, and human female inferiority was both a major proof and a chief witness of this theory.

Darwin concluded that men shaped women’s evolution the male’s liking by sexual selection, just as animal breeders shaped animals to the needs of humans. Conversely, war tended to prune the weaker men, allowing only the more fit to return home and reproduce. Men were also the hunters, another activitiy that pruned weaker men. Women, in contrast, were not subject to these selection pressures because they “specialized in the ‘gathering’ part of the primitive economy” that did not require the strength or stamina of war or hunting.” [vi]

The major (and mistaken) justifications Darwin gave for his female inferiority conclusions are summarized in his classic work, The Descent of Man. In this book, Darwin argued that adult females of most species resembled the young of both sexes and that “males are more evolutionarily advanced than females.” He (mistakingly) concluded that since female evolution progressed at a slower rate than male evolution, a woman was “in essence, a stunted man”. This degrading view of women rapidly spread to Darwin’s scientific and academic contemporaries.

For example, Darwin’s contemporary and disciple, anthropologist  McGrigor Allan, states that women are less evolved than men and that “physically, mentally and morally, woman is a kind of adult child… it is doubtful if women have contributed one profound original idea of the slightest permanent value to the world.” [vii]

Of course, Darwin had no scientific basis for proposing these fallacies, but his biased and prejudiced claims about women spread rapidly among his scientific contemporaries.

For example, the materialist Carl Vogt, a professor of natural history at the University of Geneva, accepted all the conclusions drawn by Darwin, without subjecting them to any scientific analysis, and claimed that “the child, the female, and the senile white” all had the intellectual features and personality of the “grown -up Negro,” and that consequently they were inferior. [viii]

Herr Vogt went even further and brought forward the lie that they were actually closer to animals than men. According to Vogt, a woman was “a stunted man” whose development had been obstructed because her evolution had come to a premature halt. [ix] Vogt even claimed that the gap between males and females increases with civilization’s progress and is greatest in the advanced societies of Europe. [x] Darwin was greatly influenced by Vogt’s rantings, and stated that he was honored to count him among his most important supporters. [xi]

Evolutionist Paul Broca (1824-1880) of the Faculty of Medicine in Paris was particularly interested in the skull differences between men and women.  Broca misconstrued the relatively smaller brain in women and came up with the fallacy that women were intellectually inferior to men. Of course, that is a very irrational claim; today it has been concluded that there is no relationship between human intelligence and the size of the brain. It is absolutely impossible to come to a truthful conclusion simply by looking at the weight of the brain.

Many other evolutionists following the fallacies of Darwin and continued to claim that women are biologically and intellectually inferior to men. Furthermore, some evolutionists even classified men and women as two different psychological species. According to this fallacy, men are classified as homo-frontalis and women as homo-parietalis. Again an evolutionist writer, Elaine Morgan stated that Darwin encouraged men to work on the reasons why women were “manifestly inferior and irreversibly subordinant.”( EIaine Morgan, The Descent of Woman, New York: Stein and Day, 1972, p. 1)

Being a woman or a man would not make one superior to the other

Obviously, Darwin’s theses were based not on science, but on the culture and primitive scientific understanding of the Victorian Era he lived in. These theses gave way to harmful behavior, violence towards women and caused women to be regarded as inferior beings in many societies. Philosophies such as fascism and communism that disparage women, basically embrace Darwin’s misguided understanding regarding women.

The intellectual characteristics that Darwinists use as criteria are abilities given by Allah, irrespective of gender. In one verse, God reveals: “You who believe! If you fear [and respect] God, He will give you a standard (of right and wrong)…” (Surat al-Anfal, 29) As this verse reveals, judgment-and thus, intellect-develops not according to gender, but according to fear of God.

According to the Qur’an, men and women are equal, and superiority is defined by heedfulness.

God has imposed equal responsibilities on both, and holds both responsible for the same matters. Whether one is a male or female does not make a person superior in the Sight of God, but fear and deep love of and devotion to Him, and proper moral values do. In one of His verses, our Lord reveals that regardless of gender, those who exhibit the best behavior will receive the best reward for their moral values:

Anyone, male or female, who does right actions and is a believer, will enter the Garden. They will not be wronged by so much as the tiniest speck. (Surat an-Nisa’, 124) 

Their Lord responds to them “I will not let the deeds of any doer among you go to waste, male or female…” (Surah Al ‘Imran, 195)


The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and


[i] John R. Durant, “The Ascent of Nature in Darwin’s Descent of Man” in The Darwinian Heritage, Ed. by David Kohn, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985), p.295
[ii] Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1871 (1896 print), p.326
[iii] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[iv] Charles Darwin, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882 (Ed. by Nora Barlow), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1958, p. 232-233
[v] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vi] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 246
[vii] Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, Master Books, 2011, p. 249
[viii] Carl Vogt, Lectures on Man: His Place in Creation, and the History of Earth, edited by James Hunt, London: Paternoster Row, Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1864, xv, 192
[ix] Stephanie A. Shields, “Functionalism, Darwinism, and the Psychology of Women; A Study in Social Myth,” American Psychologist, no. 1 (1975): 749
[x] Evelleen Richards, “Darwin and the Descent of Women,” in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 75
[xi] Evelleen Richards, “Darwin and the Descent of Women,” in David Oldroyd and Ian Langham (Eds.), The Wider Domain of Evolutionary Thought (Holland: D. Reidel, 1983), 74 49

The Harbinger of a Strong Alliance: Astana Negotiations

3 02 2017


by Harun Yahya

The negotiations held in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, on January 23-24 marked a milestone towards a solution to the Syrian crisis that has been ongoing for 6 years.

The 24-hour-long talks, which ended with a joint statement by Russia, Iran and Turkey, also witnessed significant “firsts”. The following are the prominent ones:

– Over the course of the Syrian civil war that has been continuing since 2011, for the first time, the representatives of the Syrian government, armed opposition groups, Iran, Turkey and Russia came together on an official platform.  The UN Nations Envoy to Syria, Staffan de Mistura spoke about the Astana negotiations in glowing terms, using the expression “something that has not happened before.”

– The establishment of a trilateral control mechanism under the guarantee of Russia, Iran and Turkey in order to ensure a permanent ceasefire in Syria is a crucial solution-oriented step that will ensure the continuity, speed and stability of the peace talks;

– By taking a stand on the territorial integrity, unity and independence of Syria, all parties that participated in the meeting dealt the most critical political blow to the foul design of the world deep state and its proxies, which has aimed for decades to divide the region into smaller, easy-to-control parts.

–  This initiative showed that regardless of the groups, sects and views, Muslims can escape the hostility and conflict they are dragged into by the plots of the deep state and additionally they can certainly gather around a table and unite in common benefits and conclusions;

– The Astana talks proved that even the smallest and well-intentioned step towards the solidarity and cooperation among Muslims can lead to great achievements. In contrast to the four years of the Geneva talks that has yet to produce any solution, the 24-hour-long Astana negotiations achieved significant tangible progress;

– The tripartite mechanism comprised of Russia, Iran and Turkey that will monitor the ceasefire process reached a mutual consensus for the first-time stating, “there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict and it can only be solved through a political peace process”. The same statement included that the trilateral mechanism supports the participation of the opposition groups in the Geneva talks that will open at the end of February.

– All the participant parties in the meeting made it clear that they definitely won’t deal with militant groups such as the PYD/YPG, or radical, blood-shedding structures such as ISIS and al-Nusra willing to have a share in the region by taking advantage of this environment laden with crises and conflicts. Thus, the negotiations put forth a strong common stance stating that the deep world state and its proxies could not have a say in the future of Syria and the region.

– It became evident that Iran, which has long been facing a difficult challenge against the severe pressures, threats and sanctions of imperialism, can participate to be a significant international actor when supported by true friends and allies;

– The steps of a yet-to-be-named new and very powerful global alliance have been taken that is henceforth determined to have a true say in the region: “Russia-Iran-Turkey alliance…” This powerful alliance now exudes a strong image and impression that will become a major determining factor especially in the future of the Middle East, Africa and the entire world of Islam.

The foresight, rational and agreeable attitudes of the guarantor countries, which refrain from pursuing strict policies as necessitated by their centuries-old historical experiences and deep-rooted state traditions, made a positive impact on the regime and the opposition forces as well. Thus, it resulted in a mild, optimistic and a reconciliatory picture. The guarantor countries adopting honest, just and sincere attitudes, which is in contrast to the behavioral patterns of the deep powers that are full of the usual insidious, double-dealing, sneaky and secret plans and agendas, had substantially contributed to this positive picture.

Positive and promising statements made by the representatives of the parties after the talks in Astana were also indicative of the success achieved in the path to permanent peace and solution for Syria.

Expressing his support for the joint statement by the three guarantor countries, Syrian government representative Bashar Jaafari said, “We finally have a document based on consensus that everyone agrees upon.” The opposition spokesman Yahya al-Aridi stated that, “The opposition is ready to do everything to give life to Syria, even to negotiate under such freezing temperatures to give a chance to ceasefire.” Moscow, Tehran, Ankara and the UN also express their faith at every opportunity in the political solution, and the establishment of permanent peace and ceasefire for Syria.

Astana negotiations have definitely been a great beginning for the solution of the Syrian crisis. This newly opened path should be treaded decisively without paying any regard to the comments from the deep media trying to overshadow its success at every opportunity by its tense, pessimistic and provocative tone.

A great duty and responsibility fall on all parties, especially on the guarantor countries, with regard to the permanence of the ceasefire and the establishment of the process of peace, stability and normalization in Syria. For Syria, a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-sectarian country, the most urgent need is to ultimately attain a democracy where all parties will be represented fairly and equally by following the required transitional periods.

As a global superpower, Russia’s role and impact on the solution of the Syrian crisis is beyond question. Having said that, Iran and Turkey, two fellow Muslim countries, working in close cooperation is particularly vital for the happiness and welfare of both Syria and the Muslim community.

The best response and the most effective solution to the provocations carried out by the deep powers over denominational and ethnic differences, the wars they fueled over these factors, and the genocide they pursue against Muslims through this method in Syria and other countries of the region will again be the beautiful and unfaltering cooperation these two great Muslim countries will maintain in a spirit of unity, brotherhood and solidarity.

When the spirit of unity prevails over division, amity over enmity, friendship and brotherhood over dissension, if God is willing, the dark powers will perish in the same way salt dissolves in the water, ushering in a brand new era for the world of Islam.


The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and