By Alan Caruba

Americans greeted news of Osama bin Laden’s death with a celebration of the payback it represents for the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans on September 11, 2001.

As former Vice President Dick Cheney said on hearing the news, “Today, the message our forces have sent is clear—if you attack the United States, we will find you and bring you to justice.”

This is part of the American psyche. A great power cannot allow itself to be attacked and harmed without rendering retribution. Every day bin Laden drew breath after 9/11 was a rebuke to America.

The 9/11 attack, however, grew out of a larger context, the Islamic central concept of jihad. Far from being “a religion of peace”, the Koran is a battle plan for the conquest of the world by Islam and jihad is regarded as a sacred duty for all Muslims.

This is why political correctness regarding how we deal with Muslim demands in the United States is a danger to the nation. Islam is one big hate crime directed at all other religious faiths. Failure to understand that is to sign the nation’s and the world’s death warrant.

The irony of al Qaeda’s legacy has been the vast numbers of Muslims that have died as a result of its efforts to overthrow the governments of nations whose wrath it invoked. In the bizarre illogic of the Arab world, even as many Saudis allegedly contributed to al Qaeda, one of its aims was to overthrow the Saudi royal family who bin Laden had condemned for allowing American troops to encamp on its “sacred sands” in the first war against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.

Al Qaeda was and remains a threat to the existing governments throughout the Middle East and, of course, anywhere in the world it wants to target. The U.S. has cut off the snake’s head, but must now remain even more vigilant against retaliation. That said, there is no doubt the organization has been significantly weakened with the loss of its symbolic leader.

Osama bin Laden has become to many Arabs what the Cuban butcher, Che Guevera, became to Communists and their dupes.

My suspicion is that al Qaeda will break into more isolated, individual units in nations throughout the Middle East and become even more vulnerable to being dismembered and destroyed. It is, however, northern African and Middle Eastern nations that are being restructured from within by millions of Muslims who have grown tired of the century’s old oppression that has been Islam’s hallmark.

Americans should not expect democracy to break out in the Maghreb or the Middle East, but it can expect governments there to become more responsive to the expectations and demands of their people. Even those in the Middle East know they are far behind those in the West in terms of any true freedom and justice. They have seen it and they want it.
We are told bin Laden’s body is in American hands. My suggestion—a fanciful one—is that it be embalmed and put on display in the Smithsonian as a reminder of the threat the nation will continue to face for decades to come.

Lastly, at a time when there are discussions of cutting the defense budget, we need to take heed of the courage and skill of those military who attacked the bin Laden compound in Pakistan and rendered the ultimate justice.

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf” is a quote attributed to George Orwell, the author of “1984”, a novel warning against all forms of totalitarian government.

Americans, despite our present economic distress, have to keep in mind that our nation has real enemies in the world and they aren’t exclusively Muslim. They are the reincarnated version of the former Soviet Union, Chinese Communists, North Korea, and others that wish us ill.

Their greatest allies will be those who preach isolationism and passivity.
Thus, the role of our military, the wars we choose to fight and where we choose to fight them has never been more critical. Jihad is forever.

For that, we must put our financial house in order and soon—or we shall witness our enemies celebrating, just as we celebrate today.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

“I against my brother, I and my brother against our cousin. I, my brother and our cousin against the neighbors. All of us against the foreigner.”
– Bedouin proverb

Almost from its beginning, Islam has been a religion divided by warring camps. The tragedy of Islam is that Muslims are far more likely to die at the hands of their co-religionists than by those outside their faith. All religions have their sects and divisions, but Islam’s history is particularly defined by the violence that began shortly after the death of its founder, Mohammed.

If the turmoil in Egypt is about freedom than recent history gives little evidence that Arabs have any talent for it. Iran is a prison-nation. Syria is ruled by the son of its former dictator. Hamas rules Gaza. Monarchies. Et cetera.

I am beginning to think that the world is actually witnessing a repeat of the dispute between the two main branches of Islam, the Shias (also called Shiites) and the majority Sunnis. Meanwhile, in Egypt the killing of Christian Copts continues unabated while Iraqi Christians are being driven from that nation.
When the prophet Mohammed died in 632 AD, what followed was a struggle for control of Islam. Sunni Muslims, the largest of the two branches, believe that Ali, a cousin of Mohammed, was the fourth and last of the “rightly guided caliphs”, successors to Mohammed. Shias believe that Ali should have been the first caliph.

Preceding Ali were Abu Kakr (632-634), Umar (634-644), and Uthman (644-656). Uthman was murdered while at prayer and Ali then became the caliph. He was, however, opposed by Aisha, Mohammed’s widow and the daughter of Abu Bakr. A number of battles ensued. Ultimately, Mu’awiya declared himself caliph.

Here’s where it gets very odd. The line of Mohammed’s direct decedents through Ali ended in 873 CE when the last Shia Imam, Muhammed al-Mahdi disappeared within days of inheriting the title of caliph. He was four years old at the time!

Shias refused to believe he had died, concocting a story that he was merely “hidden” and would return.
This latter version of Shia is the heart of Iranian Islamic theology which includes the belief that, in order to facilitate his return, the world must first sink into complete chaos with massive loss of life, a kind of Islamic Armageddon.

Thus, the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran is looked upon by Sunnis and everyone else as truly a matter of life or death on a global scale. It would be the prelude to World War Three.

Sunnis take their lead from Saudi Arabia where the royal family is seen as the protectors of the faith and the two most holy sites of Islam, Mecca and Medina.

Muslims can be found in more than 200 nations these days and represent 23% of the world’s population. One out of every four people on planet Earth is a Muslim. Only 20% live in the Middle East and North Africa, the site of present conflicts.

It has been the fate of Middle Eastern and other Muslims to live with a conflict that began in the seventh century. Islam’s Sharia laws reflect seventh century values. They are at odds with hard won modern values of civilization.

The culture of the Middle East and northern Africa, dominated by Islam, has kept the people of that region in poverty and under the fist of oppression for the last 1,400 years. Mideast Muslims in the modern era have been striking out at the world blaming it, not Islam, for their problems. Al Qaeda is an example of this, along with the Taliban, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The reappearance of a modern state of Israel in 1948 brought everything to a boil. If Islam is the one true faith, the presence in its midst of a Western, democratic, militarily powerful and economically successful Israel severely challenges that belief.

After successive wars on Israel, Arab nations were repeatedly defeated. Further aggravating Muslims is that Israel is holy to both Judaism and Christianity. Jerusalem is not even mentioned by name in the Qur’an.

Sunni-Shia battles commemorate its schism and include Suffin, Karbala, and Zab, the last having been fought in Egypt.

In the last century the Middle East has been treated as the West’s fiefdom, divided among colonial powers, manipulated for control of its oil.

In recent times Middle Eastern nations were invaded, first by the former Soviet Union invading Afghanistan and, after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and 9/11, the U.S. invaded Iraq twice. From 1980 to 1988, Iraq waged a long war against Iran that ended in a stalemate. Syria occupied Lebanon for decades. There have been clashes as well between Muslim Pakistan and largely Hindu India.

President Obama’s insistence that the Muslim Brotherhood play a role in any future government of Egypt ignores the fact that it is sworn to kill Christians and Jews or make them dhimmi, subject to taxes and humiliation.

In its own words the Brotherhood’s guiding principles are, “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

The Mubarak regime ruthlessly suppressed the Brotherhood that, among other deeds, assassinated his predecessor, former prime minister, Anwar al-Sadat and just tried to assassinate his vice president, Omar Suleiman. Not exactly democracy in action.

Those who rule Egypt are sorting out their difficulties and will resume power, but while all eyes are on the land of the pharaohs, it is Iran that threatens World War III.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

Imagine that every day of your life begins with a morning call to prayer from minarets around the city or village in which you live.

Imagine that you are required to pray five times throughout the day, every day.

Imagine that the law of the land is based on Sharia, taken from the Koran.

Imagine that you live in a nation where stoning women, beheading criminals, and other draconian, ancient punishments are deemed acceptable.

Imagine being Muslim and knowing that conversion from Islam is punishable by death.

Imagine saying or doing anything that might be interpreted as disrespect for Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, can get you whipped or killed.

Imagine a religion that has no tolerance for any other religion, even those that existed for two or three thousand years prior to Islam.

Imagine a religion that sanctions suicide if it is done for the purpose of killing others.

Imagine a religion that has routinely taken over the temples and churches of other faiths and builds mosques in their place or a religion that builds its mosques upon the most holy sites of other religions.

Imagine a culture that reduces women to chattel owned by their fathers and their husbands.

Imagine a culture that permits the killing of women for “dishonoring” the family.

Imagine a religion in which a close associate of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, said, “We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill four million Americans—two million of them children—and to exile as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the (Americans’) chemical and biological weapons.”

Imagine a religion that, on Iranian television, June 25, 2004, says, “May Allah, by virtue of the Hidden Iman, remove the evil America and Israel from humanity.”

A recent news report says “Al-Qaida is on the verge of producing radioactive weapons after sourcing nuclear material and recruiting rogue scientists to build ‘dirty’ bombs, according to leaked diplomatic documents.”

In his book, “In the words of our enemies”, Jed Babbin, wrote “Like the Nazis, the radical Islamists play on the same sense of persecution and cultural inferiority that many people in underdeveloped nations possess because they are oppressed. And, like the Nazis, the Islamists have convinced their followers that the problems of their world are the fault of others. The Islamists blame every ill of their world on America, the West, the Jews, and Israel.”

The Middle East and Northern African nations in which Islam dominates are in a state of turmoil, seeking to overthrow the despots that have ruled for decades. No matter who is selected to replace them, Islam remains the guiding principle in the lives of their people.

Imagine a religion that divides the world into Dar al Islam, the land of Islam, and Dar al Harb, the land of war.

They cannot be accommodated.

They negotiate only with the end goal of achieving domination.

They cannot be deterred except through the use of force.

The translation of the word “Islam” is “submission.”

We share the planet with 1.6 billion Muslims and we must either convert them or defeat them.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

The Holocaust of the last century is remembered for the mass murder of Europe’s Jewish population, an estimated six million who perished. In total, an estimated eleven to seventeen million Europeans, Jews and Christians, died in the Nazi concentration and death camps or were murdered outright in their homelands.

Records were lost or didn’t list religion, but the lesser known story of the Holocaust was the death of millions of Christians, three million of whom were Poles, predominantly Catholics, killed by the Nazis for being Poles. They have a special place in Jewish history because many Poles, risking immediate execution if caught, were among the “righteous Gentiles” who were rescuers of Jews.

I cite this because there is a new Holocaust abroad in the world and it is directed at Christians, particularly in the Middle East and throughout Africa, wherever Islam is the dominant religion. Nor is this is a new phenomenon; Christians were widely persecuted under the Ottomans (Turks) when their empire encompassed much of the Middle East.

It is clearly manifesting itself again and to far too little notice.

Let it be said, too, that Islam is an equal opportunity enemy of all other faiths as was seen in the 2008 attack in Mumbai, India, that included India’s tiny Bene Israel Jewish community. The conflict between Islam and India’s Hindus goes back centuries and resulted in the creation of Pakistan as a separate Muslim state when India gained its independence.

Why has there been so little consistent coverage of the on-going attack on Christians? This is especially curious insofar as it is estimated that there are more than two billion Christians worldwide, about a third of the global population. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that they are the victims, not the perpetrators of this horror.

Today thousands of Iraqi Christians are fleeing to the comparative safety of the Kurdish area and other countries. Indeed, many Americans are unaware that much of the U.S. Arab population is, in fact, Christian, not Muslim.

In mid-December, The Telegraph, a London daily, reported that “some 1,000 families, roughly 6,000 people, have arrived in the northern Kurdish areas from Baghdad, Mosul, and Nineveh” according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. “Several thousand have crossed into Syria, Jordan and Lebanon.”

Egypt is home to some twelve million Copts, otherwise known as the Coptic Orthodox Church. They have been in Egypt since 54 A.D. when St. Mark, a North African Jew, one of seventy apostles of the early church brought Christianity to that ancient land. The invasion of Muslims in 643 A.D created the inevitable adversity. On New Year’s Eve, there was a terrorist attack on the Coptic Church in Alexandria that killed 21 parishioners.

Copts have been routinely targeted for all manner of abuses and, unsurprisingly, Egypt is the epicenter for anti-Semitism in the Middle East. Officially the Arab Republic of Egypt, it has been ruled by President Hosni Mubarack since 1981. By contrast, the U.S. has had six presidents since then.

Boutros Boutros-Ghalli, a Copt and former secretary-general of the U.N., is president of the National Council of Human Rights in Cairo. In a Jan 21 article in the Wall Street Journal he cited Egypt as “a model of religious tolerance in the region” and noted that “thousands of Muslims gathered around churches across the country (on Jan 6, the eve of the Coptic Christmas) to act as human shields, protecting their Christian neighbors during their Mass.”

The exodus of Christians from the Middle East and incidents in African nations where an estimated 40% of the population are Christians speaks to the persecution that has spread everywhere before and since the rise of the Islamic Revolution, sparked by events in Iran in 1979. This has since led to the creation of Hezbollah and Hamas, two Iranian proxies. Al Qaeda, created to expel the Russians from Afghanistan, has been the tip of the Islamist sword, perpetrating 9/11 and other attacks worldwide.

The persecution historically directed against Judaism is now commonplace in its more lethal manifestations against Christians. Since the Old Testament is part of the Christian liturgy, an attack on Jews is an attack on Christians and vice-versa.

The post-war rise of secularism in Europe, along with demographic shifts in which large numbers of Muslims have taken up residence in European nations is having its affect on both Christian and Jewish communities there.

In America, the denigration of Christianity it is less visible and is not by definition persecution. A majority Christian nation, America has been experiencing a rise in efforts to diminish the acknowledgement of Christianity’s role in the nation’s history and by efforts to limit Christian symbols, prayers, and even the celebration of Christmas in public institutions and places.

Slowly, American, European and Christians worldwide are beginning to realize that they are locked in a religious war. It is a war that Christianity must engage. The silence of church leaders is no longer an option. It is a war between the 7^th century and the 21^st century.

It is a misnomer to call it a “war on terror.” Terror is a tactic, but this is a war against Islam because Islam has been at war with all other faiths since its inception.

In New York City, when Muslims seek to build a mosque within steps of Ground Zero, they are simply exalting the atrocity of 9/11. It begs the question why its confessed perpetrator, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, has not, ten years later, been brought to trial.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

 

WesternFront America

Muhammad, the self-proclaimed prophet of Allah, died in 632 AD. As historian James Carroll notes in his forthcoming book about Jerusalem, “The next year, only two years after the Byzantine Christians had reconquered Jerusalem…a mounted force of Bedouin fighters who revered the Prophet’s memory invaded the Byzantine-controlled territory of Palestine, near Gaza.” They called themselves Muslims.

Only five years after Muhammad’s death, Umar ibn al-Khattab, his successor “led tribal bands as one army, quickly taking control of lands from Iraq to Egypt.” In 637 AD, “Muslim forces laid siege to Jerusalem.” With the exception of a brief period in the twelfth century, Muslim rule of Jerusalem, a city sacred to Jews and Christians, “would last one and a third millennia until 1917.”

A recent survey taken in Islamic countries by the Pew Research foundation revealed that a majority in the Muslim world still favor cutting off hands for theft, stoning people to death for adultery, and insist that Islam play a major role in politics. What many in the West still fail to understand is that the grip of Islam and its seventh century mindset remains fully intact for many of the more than a billion Muslims worldwide.

The resurgence of a militant Islam threatens to drag the entire world back to an era of barbarity and ignorance banished by Western civilization, the enlightenment, and the spread of Democracy. The brief period of tolerance for other faiths exhibited during the Islamic conquest of Spain was the exception, not the rule.

In our era it was George W. Bush who thwarted Muslim dreams of world domination. Following 9/11 it was his resistance that protected Americans against further attacks during his two terms in office.

In a November commentary, Dr. Walid Phares, a senior fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and author of “Future Jihad: Terrorist Strategies Against America”, noted that “Throughout the summer and fall, U.S. authorities witnessed a significant rise in jihadist activity, using increasingly sophisticated operational strategies.”

“According to open-source reports, between 2001 and 2008, U.S. agencies stopped one or two terror attempts a year. However, from 2009 until today, the government has been uncovering one or two cases a month, a troubling growth in jihadist activities.”

It should be lost on no one that the increase coincides with the advent of the Obama administration and his absurd claims that America is not a Christian nation or that Muslims played any role in its history other than as Barbary pirates.

Largely unreported, on a weekly basis throughout the Middle East and elsewhere, Islam’s holy warriors continue to kill Muslims and Christians. In the West, they have perpetrated terrorist attacks in London, Madrid, and on 9/11 in New York.

On December 9, federal officials arrested a Maryland man and charged him with plotting to blow up an Army recruiting center near Baltimore. Antonio Martinez, a 21-year-old Muslim convert who calls himself Muhammed Hussain, wanted to kill as many U.S. soldiers as possible.

Earlier, in Portland, Oregon, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, a Somali youth, was thwarted from killing Americans during a Christmas tree lighting celebration. Farooque Ahmed, a Virginia man, was arrested in connection with a plot to attack the Washington, D.C. subway system; Ahmed, a native of Pakistan, had been granted U.S. citizenship.

Only the failure of his car bomb prevented Faisal Shahzad, also formerly of Pakistan and a U.S. citizen, from killing and injuring Americans in New York’s Times Square. A trial is set for Najibullah Zazi, the father of Mohammad Wali Zazi who pled guilty to a terrorist plot involving the New York subway system.
It is folly to think that America will not continue to be subject to terror attacks, but the Obama administration has largely refused to publicly confront this reality except in the form of the intrusive and objectionable airport pat-downs and scans. If a commercial airliner is bombed, it will surely have begun its flight in a foreign airport.

Incredibly, Janet Napolitano, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security recently announced that Ari Alikhan, who DHS identified as “a devout Muslim”, as the Assistant Secretary for Policy Development and swore in Kareem Shora, another “devout Muslim” born in Damascus, Syria, as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council.

How crazed is this? Or are we meant to wait until President Obama is voted out of office until we can begin to feel safe anywhere in America?

Alan Caruba writes a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com. An author, business and science writer, he is the founder of The National Anxiety Center.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

A common complaint against Islam is that the “good” Muslims don’t condemn the Muslims who are terrorists.

Lately, an old declaration by a fiqh council has been popping up. [A fiqh council is made of Islamic jurists who are experts in Sharia law and it applications.] Dozens of imams and Islamic groups condemn terrorism by signing a fatwa [judgment]. It sounds great, but how does it look under closer examination? Take this sentence:

“Islam strictly condemns religious extremism and the use of violence against innocent lives.”

What could be possibly wrong with this strict condemnation? The possible splinter in the banister is what specific words mean. Take “extremism” for example. The average Kafir (non-believer) thinks of terror. Terror is extreme, by definition, but what we are actually talking about is religious extremism, in particular, Islam. What is extreme Islam? Surely Islamic terrorism is extreme Islam.

Before we can examine “extreme Islam”, we must define Islam. Islam is the political/religious doctrine found the Koran and the Sunna (Mohammed’s perfect life-example.) The Sunna is found in the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) and the Hadith (the Traditions, small Mohammed stories). The Koran, the Sira and the Hadith compose the Trilogy. The Trilogy defines Islam. If it is in the Trilogy, it is Islam. If it is in the Trilogy it is normal Islam.

What is the content of the Trilogy? Murder, plots against the enemies of Islam, assassinations, mass executions, sneak attacks, torture, Jew-hatred, theft, kidnappings, open warfare, and more. Since they are in the Trilogy, these actions are normal, not extreme. September 11 attack on the World Trade Center was not extremism.

So far as terror goes, terror is as Islamic as a call-to-prayer.

Koran 8:12 Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the Kafirs’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”

Bukhari 1,7,331 Mohammed:
I have been given five things, which were not given to any one else before me:
1. Allah made me victorious by awe, by His frightening my enemies for a distance of one month’s journey.

The fiqh council’s fatwa includes a quote from the Koran:

Koran 5:32 whoever killed a human being, unjustly, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind.

The problem is that this quote from the Islamic scholars is taqiyya (sacred deception). Look at what they left out:

Koran 5:32 That was why We laid it down for the Jews that whoever killed a human being, unjustly, shall be regarded as having killed all mankind

That advice was for the Jews–the Jews, not the Muslims. Let’s examine the next two verses that advise the Muslims:

Koran 5:33 Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter: except those that repent before you reduce them. For you must know that Allah is forgiving and merciful.

Koran 5:35 Believers, have fear of Allah and seek the right path to Him. Fight valiantly for His cause, so that you may triumph.

When Muslims kill a Kafir, it is regarded as a sacred act, jihad.

Now look at the word, “innocent”. Mohammed sent out his jihadists on seven raids before they were successful on their eighth attempt to destroy the Kafirs’ caravan. It is significant that they used deception to accomplish this task. The jihadists disguised themselves as “religious” pilgrims to approach the caravan drivers. They murdered one, captured those who did not escape and stole their merchandise.

What was the guilt of the caravan drivers? They were Meccan Kafirs. That was their only guilt. We might say that they were innocent, but they were part of a group that denied the fact that Mohammed was the prophet of the only god, Allah. That is guilt enough to be murdered. No one who denies that Mohammed is the prophet of Allah is innocent.

If you know the doctrine of Islam, the entire fatwa condemning terrorism is pure deception. Why be surprised? Mohammed repeatedly advised Muslims to deceive if it would advance the Islamic cause, and the fiqh council follows the Sunna of Mohammed to the letter.

The reason that this deception works is the average Kafir politician, reporter, pastor, priest or rabbi is deliberately and willfully ignorant. It is not that Islam is so skillful; but that Kafir leaders are such ignorant, politically correct cowards who refuse to educate themselves to the detriment of their own religious faith and their own country.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, www.politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

One of the many attacks that Muslims and their apologists make against their opponents is that Kafir (non-Muslim) critics are self-educated. They say the only way to understand Islam is to ask a Muslim or a university trained “expert”. What could be wrong with this advice?

Let’s use an actual problem; today Sharia law is being used to show how Islam works at the political level and how it is a disaster for our civilization.

Sharia is such a horror show for Kafirs that Islam and its apologists say many things to draw attention away from it. They say that Sharia is an antique from the year 1400 and no one really uses such an old text (an example is the Traveller, see below). In short, it is a relic of history; it doesn’t really apply today. Don’t worry.

A professor says that the Sharia is not really important; Sharia is flexible; it changes; there are different schools; no nation is actually ruled by Sharia. Sharia is nothing to worry about. So says the “expert”. This judgment is delivered by a “university expert”. We know this is not true. We know that Sharia is a driving force in Islam. How could an “expert” be wrong?

How do we determine the true nature of Islam? How do we prove anything about Islam? How can you refute an “expert”?

A classic Sharia text, Reliance of the Traveller, has no less than four high scholars, who say that in 1991 that the Reliance is to the benefit of the Muslim community and the path of Muslims today. The university experts dismiss the Sharia as being irrelevant today. Who are we to believe, the professors or the prominent Islamic scholars?

This question can be answered by the fact that all Sharia is based on Koran and Sunna. Sunna is pure Mohammed and Koran is the delivered by Mohammed, so we can say that Mohammed is the only standard for truth in Islam.

If an expert gives advice about Islam or Sharia that agrees with Mohammed, the expert is right. If the expert disagrees with Mohammed then the expert is wrong. Hence, the only way to know Islam is to know Mohammed. This translates into knowing Hadith (Traditions) and Sira (life of Mohammed). If you would read Hadith and Sira (which are well translated), you would not need an expert, you would be an expert.

However, the experts denigrate any knowledge based on the actual reading of Islamic texts. Sir Isaac Newton was self-educated about physics. Einstein was self-educated in relativity. Indeed, people who are self-educated in their area of advancement have done the greatest work in humanity. However, for you to be self-educated is an act of bigotry.

The highest goal of education is that the students will be able to educate themselves after school. The elites do not want any ideas that do not come from “experts”. You might get ideas that are not elitist approved. The elites all favor Islam and never advance any critical ideas.

We have to educate ourselves because the universities are bankrupt on the subject of Islam. They do not allow any teaching about Islam that is critical and uses critical thought from the standpoint of the Kafir. No debate is allowed. Only Muslims and dhimmi apologists are allowed to speak about Islam. Anyone who disagrees based on their own understanding is a bigot.

The first European universities were based on the study of authorities. One day in class the discussion was about how many teeth a horse had. Aristotle said one number and Galen said another. The way to resolve this was to establish who was the greatest man. While the argument about whether Aristotle was a greater scholar than Galen went on, a student went out into the courtyard and counted the number of teeth in a tethered horse. When he returned with the number, the teacher beat him. Knowledge that was based on experimental data and self-education was forbidden. That is the nature of the academic “authorities” and the media today.

To know which expert is right is not a matter of college credentials or religion, but knowing which expert agrees with Koran and Sunna. Islam begins with Mohammed and ends with Mohammed.

Get to know Mohammed. To know Mohammed is to be an expert. Be self-taught and read the foundational books-Koran, Sira and Hadith.

Note: Don’t think that you can pick up any biography of Mohammed and get to know the true man. Almost every biography of Mohammed is whitewashed. The Sira (Ishaq’s Sira Rasul Allah can be found in Mohammed and the Unbelievers) is the gold standard. If the bio does not include the annihilation and subjugation of the Jews, torture, slavery, plots, raids, assassinations, battles, secret agents and spies, then it is not a complete biography. Mohammed’s rise to power included an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks for the last 9 years of his life.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC, www.politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

One of the most frequently used arguments heard in the defense of Islam is that the Bible is just as violent as the Koran. The logic goes like this. If the Koran is no more violent than the Bible, then why should we worry about Islam? This argument is that Islam is the same as Christianity and Judaism. This is false, but this analogy is very popular, since it allows someone who knows nothing about the actual doctrine of Islam to talk about it. “See, Islam is like Christianity, Christians are just as violent as Muslims.” If this is true, then you don’t have to learn anything about the actual Islamic doctrine.

However, this is not a theological argument. It is a political one. This argument is not about what goes on in a house of worship, but what goes on the in the marketplace of ideas.

Now, is the doctrine of Islam more violent than the Bible? There is only one way to prove or disprove the comparison and that is to measure the differences in violence in the Koran and the Bible.

The first item is to define violence. The only violence that matters to someone outside of either Islam or Christianity or Judaism is what they do to the “other”, political violence. Cain killing Abel is not political violence. Political violence is not killing a lamb for a meal or making an animal sacrifice. Note, however, a vegan or a PETA member considers both of these actions to be violent, but it is not violence against them.

The next item is to compare the doctrines both quantitatively and qualitatively. The political violence of the Koran is called “fighting in Allah’s cause”, or jihad.

We must do more than measure the jihad in the Koran. Islam has three sacred texts: Koran, Sira and Hadith, the Islamic Trilogy. The Sira is Mohammed’s biography. The Hadith are his traditions—what he did and said. Sira and Hadith form the Sunna, the perfect pattern of all Islamic behavior.

The Koran is the smallest of the three books, the Trilogy. It is only 16% of the Trilogy text . This means that the Sunna is 84% of the word content of Islam’s sacred texts. This statistic alone has large implications. Most of the Islamic doctrine is about Mohammed, not Allah. The Koran says 91 different times that Mohammed is the perfect pattern of life. It is much more important to know Mohammed than the Koran. This is very good news. It is easy to understand a biography about a man. To know Islam, know Mohammed.

It turns out that jihad occurs in large proportion in all three texts. Here is a chart about the results:

It is very significant that the Sira devotes 67% of its text to jihad. Mohammed averaged an event of violence every 6 weeks for the last 9 years of his life. Jihad was what made Mohammed successful. Here is a chart of the growth of Islam.

Basically, when Mohammed was a preacher of religion, Islam grew at the rate of 10 new Muslims per year. But when he turned to jihad, Islam grew at an average rate of 10,000 per year. All of the details of how to wage jihad are recorded in great detail. The Koran gives the great vision of jihad—world conquest by the political process. The Sira is a strategic manual and the Hadith is a tactical manual of jihad.

Now let’s go to the Hebrew Bible. When we count all of the political violence, we find that 5.6% of the text is devoted to it. There is no admonition towards political violence in the New Testament.

When we count the magnitude of words devoted to political violence, we have 327,547 words in the Trilogy and 34,039 words in the Hebrew Bible . The Trilogy has 9.6 times as much wordage devoted to political violence as the Hebrew Bible.

The real problem goes far beyond the quantitative measurement of ten times as much violent material; there is the qualitative measurement. The political violence of the Koran is eternal and universal. The political violence of the Bible was for that particular historical time and place. This is the vast difference between Islam and other ideologies. The violence remains a constant threat to all non-Islamic cultures, now and into the future. Islam is not analogous to Christianity and Judaism in any practical way. Beyond the one-god doctrine, Islam is unique unto itself.

Another measurement of the difference between the violence found in the Judeo/Christian texts as opposed to that of Islam is found in the use of fear of violence against artists, critics and intellectuals. What artist, critic or intellectual ever feels a twinge of fear if condemning anything Christian or Jewish? However, look at the examples of the violent political threats and murders of Salman Rushdie, Theo van Gogh, Pim Fortuyn, Kurt Westergaard of the Danish Mohammed cartoons, and many others. What artist, critic or intellectual has not had a twinge of fear about Islam when it comes to free expression? The political difference in the response to the two different doctrines is enormous. The political fruit from the two trees is as different as night and day.

It is time for so-called intellectuals to get down to the basics of judging Islam by its actual doctrine, not making lame analogies that are sophomoric assertions. Fact-based reasoning should replace fantasies that are based upon political correctness and multiculturalism.

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink /blog/the-political-violence-of-the-bible-and-the-koran/
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

By Bill Warner

One of the most common arguments of the supporters of the Ground Zero mosque includes religious freedom as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Religion is seen as the framework to support building a mosque and community center near the site of the former World Trade Towers. Is this really about religion? Step back and look at the controversy. Do you feel like you are taking part in a religious exercise or a political fracas?

There is a vast confusion about what a religion is and is not. Currently the operative rule is that anything associated with Islam is a religious affair where all of the freedom of religion is applied to the action or event. Islam’s actions are religious and if you oppose it, you are an un-American bigot.

It is time to stop and take a look at what we mean by a religion. There are about as many Buddhists in America today as there are Muslims. When was the last time you remember a Buddhist demand of any kind? Do Buddhists set up councils to shape the textbooks and demand Buddhist finance? Does the government make a big announcement when Buddhists are appointed to high posts? Are there even any Buddhists in any White House appointments? Do Buddhists complain? Never, for these are political actions, and Buddhism has almost no political outreach. Buddhism in America is purely religious, not political at all.

Yet the media and the Internet are consumed by talk and argument about Islam. The discussion is never about how many rounds of prayer to do or whether a certain food is halal (religiously proper). No, the focus is always on something that non-Muslims are to do to accommodate an Islamic religious practice.

There is a practical working definition of religion as compared to politics. Religious practices are done by those who follow that religion and are motivated for achieving paradise and avoiding hell. Outsiders are not involved in those religious acts. If it is about going to heaven and avoiding hell, then it is religious. However, if the religion makes a demand on those outside of its own group, then that demand is political.

Most people think that the Koran is a religious text. Instead, 64% of the text (by word count) is about non-Muslims, who are called Kafirs. The Koran is fixated on Kafirs and makes many demands on them. Not the least is that Kafirs submit to the rule of Islamic Sharia law. Ultimately Sharia law is the pure expression of Islamic politics and it completely contradicts our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Under Sharia there is no freedom of speech, wives may be beaten and apostates murdered.

Mohammed had little success with Islam until he transformed it into a political system. He preached the religion of Islam in Mecca for 13 years and made about 150 converts. He left Mecca and moved to Medina. In Medina he turned to politics and jihad. In the last 9 years of his life, Mohammed was involved in an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks. The political method persuaded every Arab to convert to Islam. The religion did not succeed; it was politics that made Islam powerful.

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink
copyright (c) CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com

 

WesternFront America

If General Petraeus is now handing down edicts as to what kind of expression is going to set off radical Islamists in regards to the plans to burn Koran’s by one church, is he also going to hand down similar opinions regarding sodomite nuptials and tramps sauntering about with 3/4′s of their jiggly bosoms exposed for all to see?

America has a thriving pork industry. Should we give that up also because it ticks off the Muslims?

So is it valid now to argue against sodomite matrimony with the rhetorical invocation that it might “bring harm to the troops”?

Since U.S. troops are endangered by Muslims because there are faiths in America other than Islam, does that mean we should surrender our Christianity as well?

Regarding the threat by the church playing with less than a full deck to burn Korans: in America at least you are free to have as many Korans as you want for any purpose. In lands where Islamists rule, it is against the law to own a Bible and a capital offense to be persuaded as to the veracity of that particular text.

Interesting those concerned about the questionable background of the Koran burning pastor don’t get all that worked up over the terrorist links of the ground zero imam.

The Obama administration and liberal media are the ones seeking violence in the afterglow of the Koran pyre. Otherwise, who would know what an otherwise miniscule congregation would be up to? Probably more end up dead in an average Islamic riot than attend the entire church.

In for a penny, in for a pound. Burning the Koran is not the smartest move apologetically. However, if the Florida church backs down now, Islamists will view Americans as weak and will up their demands. Will it get to the point where American military leaders and the likes of Sean Hannity will insist that Christians be castigated for holding to the divinity and exclusivity of Christ?

Seems heathen holy books are of greater concern to Obama than Christian ones. The U.S. military is reported to have burned a number of Bibles confiscated in Afghanistan.

Since the handbook of the Dove World Outreach ministerial training academy is blatantly cultic, perhaps there could be a counter protest where the advocates of religious liberty burn copies of that document instead.

The Pastor of the The Dove Christian World Outreach might actually make a good Muslim. Of those studying (or rather brainwashed) under his tutelage, he dictates how much and where they can eat (sort of like Michelle Obama), how they may interact with members of the opposite sex, and even the kinds and extent of contact they may have with their families.

If deadbeat mobs in the trashpile nations of the earth have the time to rampage over the actions of a single pastor of a small church, they obviously aren’t anywhere near starvation so we should cut out the foreign aide.

Am beginning to wonder if the entire Koran Immolation issue is something akin to how the Sith manipulated both sides in the Clone Wars.

Questions regarding the Koran immolation. If the cult purchased the texts they plan to destroy, isn’t that supporting Islam with the pocket book? And are the Korans in question Arabic or English translations? If English, the fanatics most likely to fly into a rampage don’t even view these texts as actual Korans.

Interesting, isn’t it, how the Christians are always ordered to back down. Seldom is their a stern response promised if Muslims get out of line.

Frederick Meekins

 

WesternFront America