Enjoy The Conditions Of Omar

"Today in the West the Conditions of Omar are most apparent in the constant flattery of Islam by western leaders whilst more and more Muslims are openly hostile to our communities. And, with the creeping imposition of Islamic laws, customs, and values across the world, the Conditions are being established on a global scale."

Dear Reader,

The Pact of Omar was a treaty drawn up between Muhammad's successor Caliph Omar and the conquered Christians and Jews in his domain. The Pact was based on Muhammad's treatment of conquered people. It set out the rules Christians and Jews had to abide by in order to be protected from further jihad attacks. This pact formed the basis of the Conditions of Omar.

Verse 9:29 of the Koran sets out the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. It says,

Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.”

In Islamic parlance “People of the Book” refers to Christians and Jews—they have a book (other religions at the time didn’t have a book). Under conquest they had a third choice other than conversion to Islam or death; this was to live under Sharia as inferior people suffering various humiliations, one of which was the jizyah, a tax levied only on non-Muslims. The non-Muslims are known as dhimmis (pronounced dimmees).

The relationship that the Conditions set up has the following characteristics:

Jihad violence is held off (like a dragon on a chain) as long as the dhimmis do not breach the Conditions

If the Conditions are breached (even by one dhimmi) the jihad violence is resumed against any or all of the dhimmi community

Dhimmis therefore lived in a state of permanent vulnerability and fear. Each dhimmi and the dhimmi community as a whole faced a perpetual concern lest anyone breached the Conditions and brought about catastrophe

Other than paying the non-Muslim poll tax or jizyah what conditions had to be kept?

Dhimmis were forbidden from:

Criticizing or mocking Islam or Muhammad. Only praise for Islam and Muhammad was allowed
Criticizing the Conditions of Omar: the very conditions of subjugation under which they lived
Testifying against a Muslim in court
Studying Islam - thus keeping them ignorant of its teachings
Cursing a Muslim
Raising a hand against a Muslim, even in self-defense, on pain of having it amputated
Displaying their religious symbols

These are only a sample of the Conditions, chosen to highlight why they are relevant today – which I will come to later. There were geographical and historical variants on the Conditions but they all held to the same theme – the humiliation and subjugation of non-Muslims and the maintenance of multiple forms of discrimination against them.

The Conditions also worked in conjunction with each other. For example, if a Muslim accused a Christian of a capital offence, such as trying to convert a Muslim, the Christians’ own testimony was not valid in their defence.

Dhimmis were ‘protected’ as long as they met the Conditions. If a dhimmi community (or any member of it) broke the Conditions it was the duty of the local Muslim community to restart the jihad against them.

A key outcome of this scenario is the desire of non-Muslims to avoid confrontations with Muslims and to police one another to prevent deviant individuals destroying the ‘protection’ of the Conditions.

Pakistan is a Muslim country where the Conditions of Omar are operating to some degree today. In March 2013, because one Christian was accused of blasphemy, some 3,000 Muslims attacked the Christian Joseph Colony of Lahore, burning two churches and 160 Christian homes.

In 2009 in Gojra, eight Christians were burned alive, 100 houses looted and 50 homes set ablaze after another blasphemy accusation.

We can see why dhimmis live in a state of perpetual concern for the potential impact of their personal actions on their whole community. And, why the whole community lives in a state of perpetual concern about the potential consequences of the conduct of any one person among them.

May 5th 2014, Bangladesh, a 3,000 strong Muslim mob attacked Hindu households and a temple after two youths were alleged to have slandered the ‘prophet’ Muhammad on Facebook.

These are just a few examples to show how the Conditions are applied in practise and that they are still active today. Islam as a body of belief has never discarded them and never will because, realistically, it can’t. You can read many more examples of the Conditions in action today if you look up Raymond Ibrahim’s Bulletin of Christian Persecution online. His book, "Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christianity" is also very informative.

You might like to believe that the application of Islamic law or Sharia is receding. It isn’t. Over the last 60 years Sharia worldwide has been extending and intensifying. See here.

And that brings us to the here and now.

Muslim minorities in non-Muslim countries have brought Sharia with them. The Conditions of Omar are simply a subset of Sharia which sets out how Muslims should deal with non-Muslims under conquest.

You might well say that what Muslims do to Hindus or Christians or other non-Muslims in Bangladesh or Pakistan is none of our business. That is called the death of conscience.

You might well say that we have not been conquered. That is only partly true. A process of conquest is underway.

The Conditions of Omar are being established today right under our noses. They may not be coming about because we are under occupation but they are being established as norms of behaviour. Sometimes we are imposing the Conditions on ourselves as a gesture of goodwill or to prevent discrimination; sometimes we are imposing them due to fear of jihad terrorism OR ANGRY RIOTING; sometimes they are established by default.

One of the subtle ways we are surrendering to the Conditions is by policing what non-Muslims can say about Islam and Muslims. See this example.

Anyone living among Muslims today knows that being openly critical of Islam or Muhammad is risky. Plenty of examples have set the precedent: in 2004 Theo van Gogh was murdered for making a film critical of Islamic attitudes to women; in 1989 Salman Rushdie was forced into hiding after writing The Satanic Verses, his Japanese translator was murdered; in 2004 the Danish cartoons episode erupted in which 162 people around the world were killed during protests, again demonstrating how some Muslims will kill people totally unrelated to the ‘offence'.

These are a small selection but they point to 2 clear principles: (1) the author of something considered critical of Islam is liable to be killed; (2) anyone can be killed in revenge against the non-Muslim world. Both of these conform to rules set out in the Conditions.

As a result of such actions and threats most publications refused to print the cartoons. Public figures came to the defence of a religion they knew nothing about. Those seeking to rock the boat further by printing the cartoons became the targets of condemnation rather than the Muslims threatening violence.

Again, this conforms to the Conditions and the behaviour of dhimmi populations who feel vulnerable and threatened. The dhimmi populations turn to self-policing in order to prevent deviant individuals triggering violence from Muslims. This strategy buys into the idea that its entirely up to non-Muslims to refrain from behaviour which upsets Muslims – a dhimmi outlook.

The principle has become established that non-Muslims should not confront Muslims about their behaviour or their beliefs. Only praise of Islam is allowed. This is submission – especially in view of the fact that Islamic beliefs call for the conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims.

In the UK and many European countries legal measures have also been put in place to suppress critical voices about Islam. The Race and Religious Hatred Act 2006 makes it an offence carrying a 2 year prison term for: “A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening... if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred.”

Now how do you prove intent here? Is trying to warn one’s fellow citizens about the divisive and supremacist nature of a religion the same as stirring up hatred against followers of that religion? If so, there is no way to reasonably warn against such a religion. And who would benefit from that? …Not the intended victims, obviously.

Make no mistake; this is happening around you now. Paul Weston, a prospective Member of the European Parliament, was arrested outside the Guildhall, Winchester on April 26th 2014 for quoting Winston Churchill’s damning assessment of Islam. He was charged under the terms of the Race and Religious Hatred Act 2006 for racially and religiously aggravated harassment.

The incident described above is yet another example of the dhimmi relationship in action. Behind all the waffle about discrimination and protecting minorities there is something which explains all the rationalisation taking place: fear. Fear of Muslim violence directed at anyone and everyone for offences against Islam.

You will find the word ‘Islamophobia’ used to describe those who are critical of Islam. What does it mean?

It doesn’t really mean anything; it’s designed as an intimidating word to enforce dhimmi behaviour. It carries a cocktail of messages which have certain key aims:

Phobia suggests an irrational and exaggerated fear with no basis in reality. Fear is a negative reaction and under the Conditions only praise for Islam is allowed
The word also suggests dislike or hatred of Islam. This is also a negative reaction and under the Conditions only praise for Islam is allowed
Thus if you are positive about Islam you are a good person; but if you are negative about Islam you are a bad person. This creates a reluctance to find out more about Islam and discover what you really think about it. This fosters ignorance of Islam which is another requirement of dhimmis under the Conditions

I have tried to give you some understanding of what the Conditions of Omar are, how they are applied in Muslim controlled countries, and how they are being established in non-Muslim countries.

Why on earth should you enjoy the Conditions of Omar?

Given the reluctance of most people to face anything unpleasant, the invitation to enjoy is simply an enticement to get your attention. But it is also more than this.

The 20th century Muslim theorist Syed Qtub said that the only freedom that should be supported was the ‘freedom’ to choose Islam. Non-Muslims under the Conditions of Omar would be gradually stripped of their freedoms so that they were left with only one: the freedom to choose Islam. He said, with a completely straight face, that non-Muslims should enjoy this erosion of their freedoms.

Also, in today’s climate only praise of Islam is allowed. The statement is an expression of what it seeks to change. It’s meant ironically.

The statement is also designed to arouse your curiosity but to do so in a way that cannot be construed as ‘hate speech’. It is positive in mood, though the irony becomes clear later. It is in itself inoffensive but it carries an important message.

In accordance with the Conditions, your ignorance of Islam is required. In today’s world ignorance and silence about Islam are both forms of submission. ‘Dumb’ is a word that encapsulates both ignorance and silence. We are being made dumb and submissive.

The Conditions create a system of gradual enslavement and what the system most needs to succeed right now is your ignorance and silence about Islam.

Finally, you can enjoy the Conditions of Omar by resisting them. Open your eyes to where we are and accept that this is your place in history and do what is right. Many of those in the Greatest Generation who fought Nazism felt it was the best part of their lives. All non-Muslims now have the opportunity to fight for their cultures and their civilisations.

Fighting great evils puts us in a different moral space; we learn more about real human values like courage, truth, and goodness. By standing up to barbarism in defence of higher values we become minor heroes.

Even now, when Muslims are unleashing huge persecution against Christians and other non-Muslims, there is a reticence and dread of offending. There is a posture of apologising and appeasement, of trying to identify what it is in ourselves that is displeasing. All the while the driving force of jihad is ignored.

In the face of such obvious evil, is wearing a badge saying “Enjoy The Conditions Of Omar” too much to ask? By so doing you will act as a signpost that directs others to this webpage.

For your badge you can use our online SHOP or you can right click on the image above and select "Save image as" and save it to a location on your computer. You can then send it to any online maker of button badges. If you have the equipment you can even make them yourself.

So, what's the point?

  1. To spread the word about Islam's stance towards non-Muslims. Most non-Muslims are hopelessly ignorant of the Islamic worldview. They mistakenly assume that it shares the characteristics of other religions. Where they are generally positive about religion they assume that Islam must be a force for good. Where they are negative about religion they assume it is no worse or better than any other religion.
  2. To open people's eyes to the prison being erected around them. A climate has already been established in which opposition to Islam is framed as a crime. Sharia prohibitions against criticism of Islam and Muslims may not yet be directly applied but they are already indirectly applied by bogus "hate crimes"; "racism" - which is completely absurd since Islam is not a race and opposition to it cannot therefore be racist; and "Islamophobia" which is already gaining currency as a moral offence even though no-one can define it.
  3. To raise awareness that the Sharia prohibitions against non-Muslims defending themselves against Islam and Muslims are already being implemented. Criticism and mockery of Islam are forms of self-defence in today's circumstances but people have lost their jobs or been imprisoned as a result of their opposition to Islam and Sharia. This is a less draconian parallel to having one's hand amputated since one's livelihood is cut off.
  4. To raise awareness that an oppressive silence has taken hold; a silence that is the fruit of ignorance maintained by fear. There are plenty of things we could wear on a badge or T-shirt but would we get away with it? How about this: "Don't be fooled by Islam - Jihadwatch" or "Don't let Islam ruin your day" Apart from the problem of aggressive responses there's the problem that any statement of this type is seen as "hate" (an abstract thing which apparently is always bad) and the wearer's credibility is downgraded. Whatever he/she is saying is effectively locked behind an invisible wall of emotional fallacies. "Enjoy The Conditions Of Omar" teases the viewer's curiosity in a non-threatening way.
And lastly, there is only one thing left to say to those who refuse to heed the warning: Enjoy the conditions of Omar.

Resources to help you

Your first battle is to reduce your own ignorance and to clear a path through all the misinformation being spread to mislead you.  You can do this very easily by studying the many good resources available to you online. Here are a few:

  • www.InquiryIntoIslam.com has many informative articles and analyses of Islamic doctrine, history, contemporary issues, as well as primers for the novice.
  • www.PoliticalIslam.com has lots of resources on primary Islamic doctrine and the teachings of Muhammad.
  • www.JihadWatch.org gives insight into the Islamic justifications for current events including terrorism, persecution, and subversion.


Mark Durie – The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude, and Freedom, This will help you understand the worldview created by Islam, the way Islamic doctrine works as a comprehensive system, and how it has affected non-Muslims throughout its 1400 year history

Robert Spencer – The Truth about Muhammad. This will help you understand the character of Islam’s founder and how Islam itself so closely reflects his character.

Read the Koran. You will soon get to see the tenor of it, with its constant denunciations of nonbelievers and the terrors awaiting them .

The Centre for the Study of Political Islam has a series of books that are particularly helpful.

Raymond Ibrahim - Crucified Again: Exposing Islam's New War on Christianity

Read the biography of Muhammad known as the Sira. This will show you what the primary Islamic sources say about the ‘perfect model of conduct’.

Once you have attended to your own ignorance your next battle is to break the great silence in whatever way you can. If all you feel able to do is wear a badge saying “Enjoy The Conditions Of Omar” that is a lot more than most of your sleeping contemporaries, and it will point more people to the truth about Islam and its project of universal submission.

Free speech casualty in Scotland

Brian Wilson has written for the West Highland Press for 38 years since founding it with four others in 1972.

His friend and fellow columnist, Prof Macleod, a Free Church of Scotland theologian wrote a column in the paper on May 22nd 2015 about the spread of Islam in the UK in which he made the following observations:

All minorities prefer to keep a low profile.
Generations of British Muslims have done exactly that, many have made an invaluable contribution to British society, and many are perfectly prepared to listen quietly while Christians ‘witness’ to them
But when minorities become majorities, things change… in the event of Islamic dominance in Britain our friendly Muslim shopkeepers will have little option but to march behind the radicals. 
The making of this last point led to a storm of protest. Brian Wilson wrote a column in defense of freedom of speech, arguing that the usual manner of dissent from ideas is to write. Not good enough.

Brian Wilson has been sacked as editor of the paper and Prof Macleod will no longer be contributing. What a sad reflection on the state of democratic debate in the UK.

Daily Telegraph article on Brian Wilson

It is ironic that in the same week that this story broke, Raymond Ibrahim published another of his excellent articles on the plight of non-Muslims under Islamic dominance in which he provides compelling evidence of exactly the point that Prof Macleod makes.

When Muslims betray non-Muslim friends and neighbors

The Power of Stupidity

When I read the other day that Lord Neuberger, Britain's top judge, had stated that Muslim women should be able to testify in court wearing full face coverings it drove home to me yet again just how stupid the most capable people can be.

Lord Neuberger must surely be a man of at least reasonable intellect. But constrain any intellect, no matter how powerful, within the limits of certain unquestioned assumptions and you get not great judgement but great folly. This is what has happened in this case and this is what is happening over and over again in the minds of so many western leaders.

Lord Neuberger is a champion of "diversity", that ill-defined good that supposedly comes from being accepting of more and more and greater and greater differences. This acceptance transmutes the potential for hatred and conflict that naturally arises from differences into a harmonious utopia of universal tolerance. Every sect learns to accept the views of every other as a worthwhile contribution to the whole...blah, blah, blah.

Given this underlying assumption of the goodness of diversity and the gains to be made from accepting it, Lord Neuberger falls naturally into the trap of thinking that showing greater respect for different customs and cultures (apparently regardless of what those cultures actually believe) will bring about positive outcomes. How could he think otherwise? Such is the power of unquestioned assumptions.

Has Lord Neuberger ever stopped to consider whether the customs and cultures he respects show a reciprocal respect for his culture? I doubt it.

Clueless in Rochdale

Just how ignorant can you get? Rochdale worthies embracing their own subjugation.

When clean meets unclean

I was left aghast by this story from Leicestershire, UK, of a Muslim family protesting about a "non-believer" being buried next to their relative. Obviously, one expects this kind of thing from Muslims so that is not the source of my shock. What shocks me is the reaction of the authorities who seem willing to comply with the wishes of the Muslims to have the non-believer exhumed and moved somewhere else!

Where are the calls for mutual respect now; where the preaching about the value of diversity; where the outcry over Muslim hostility to non-believers? Is someone going to tell these Muslims to learn to live in peace with others? No? Well, what a surprise!

The readiness to concede to Muslim demands is the new normal. There is now in the UK an acceptance of Muslim hostility and contempt towards non-believers as normal.

It is another step downwards into servitude. Here.