VISUALIZE REVOLUTION! We can’t start to rebuild the AMERICAN middle-class until we stop electing and reelecting bribes sucking white-color criminals and until we burn down Wall Street, hang the banksters and billionaires plundering this nation and push Mexico out of our jobs, welfare lines, voting booths and borders! PUT YOUR CELL PHONE DOWN AND GET BUSY BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE.
Friday, November 2, 2018
GEOFFREY LUCK - ON ROBERT SPENCER'S BOOK ON THE JIHADIST AS A HOLY WAR TO CONVERT THE WORLD TO ISLAM
MUHAMMAD'S BLOODY CREED
Robert Spencer’s new magisterial work reveals Jihad as a holy war to convert the world.
Once upon a time in a primitive land of polytheist idolaters far, far away, an egomaniac zealot with high ambitions hit on a bright idea. On learning of the ancient Jewish prophecy of a Messiah, and the newish Christian communities’ worship of Jesus as the “Chosen One”, he decided to nominate himself as the latest in the line – the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets. If the Angel Gabriel could give the name ‘Jesus’ to Mary, why couldn’t Gabriel be recruited to authenticate Muhammad’s pronouncements?
The polytheists who worshipped 360 idols in the Ka’aba of Mecca thought this was fake news and made life difficult for the would-be prophet-poet. In thirteen years he attracted only 150 followers. So he decamped to another town. The Jews of Medina first welcomed him as a protector, but after they heard his story about travelling to Jerusalem and then to Paradise on a winged white horse with a human head, and questioned him on religion, they declared him a phony. Muhammad decided a new business model was needed: conversion by the sword. Beginning as a highwayman raiding passing caravans, he invented a unique rallying cry: “Allahu Akbar!” (My) God is the Greatest! The shout inspired his followers to kill, loot and enslave. It continues to terrify the world 1400 years. later.
I have paraphrased and simplified a complicated and disputed history of the origins of the most powerful movement the world has seen. Nobody can be certain of these events because the first account, by Ibn Ashaq, relying on hearsay and legend, was not set down until a hundred years later. But what is clear from Islam’s texts is that Muhammad set himself up as spokesman for Allah and, therefore, gatekeeper to hell and paradise. What sets Islam apart from Western notions of warfare, and the horrific excesses of the most brutal dictatorships (which it resembles), is that holy war is a central tenet, waged essentially for spiritual reward. Often seemingly irrationally. But before his death Muhammad could claim: “I have been made victorious with terror.”
That is the important message in Robert Spencer’s new book, The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS. Heavily documented but eminently readable, its magisterial sweep reveals Jihad as a holy war to convert the world, or at least compel non-believers into submission. From the Battle of Badr in 624 to the latest suicide bombing or vehicle ram-raid, there has been a continuum of atrocities with a single purpose. The immense extent of the horrors of jihad are largely unknown, or have been forgotten. For too many, especially those in authority, they have been conveniently ignored, as they welcome millions of migrants into their midst.
Spencer’s 16 books on Islam, his speeches, broadcasts and pamphlets have made him a controversial figure in the United States. He has been attacked as Islamophobic and banned from entry to Britain by Prime Minister May as a presence “not conducive to the public good.” A descendant of a Christian family forced to flee from an area now part of Turkey, for the last fifteen years Spencer has published a blog Jihad Watch, which daily records and updates attacks by Muslims around the world. He is also closely associated with the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a conservative think tank opposing the political left in the US.
Spencer’s thesis is simple – there are elements within Islam that pose a challenge to free societies. He cites chapter and verse from Islam’s own scriptures to support his assertions. But importantly, he does not say that every individual Muslim responds to the challenge to wage jihad. His message is more subtle: the Islamic imperative for Jihad remains, whether or not any Muslim individual decides to take it up. He condemns the refusal to recognise this in his final chapter entitled: “The West Loses the Will to Live.”
He cites as evidence the bizarre assertions of Western leaders that Islam is simply the “religion of peace”. After the 9/11 hijackers had done to the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon exactly as Islam had always taught, President Bush declared: “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.” Barack Obama, his successor, went further when visiting Cairo in 2009: “I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed…Partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t.” Most extreme in his stupidity, in Spencer’s view, was Pope Francis in 2013: “…authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Qur’an are opposed to every form of violence.” These fantasy views of Islam lead to calls for “respect” instead of reform. They result in the demonisation of people with real life experience of the problems Islam inflicts on the societies where it takes root — people such as Geert Wilders, apostate Ibn Warraq and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
In ten chapters, sourced at every relevant step from Islam’s own texts, he explains that Jihadists have always been candid about their reason for waging war – to subjugate infidels under the rule of Islam. Spencer starts with the 27 battles Muhammad waged from Medina, (many against his own tribe, the Quraysh), showing how conveniently Allah’s claimed pronouncements provided authority for his actions, and then became holy writ. Piety, not military might won battles, he said: “Victory is not except from Allah, the Exalted in Might, the Wise.” (Qur’an 3:123-126).
When his forces lost the Battle of Uhud, it was not Allah’s defeat, but the result of the Muslim’s failure of courage and lust for the things of this world. “Among you are some who desire this world, and among you are some who desire the Hereafter. Then he turned you back from them that He might test you.” (Qur’an 3:152).
In fact, like marauding armies throughout history, the warriors who waged jihad for Muhammad were essentially mercenaries. They fought for the booty, the treasure and especially the women they could acquire as sex slaves. As always the commander had first choice, and the defeated combatants were usually slaughtered. (The Prophet said, “The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty or will be admitted to Paradise. (Bukhari Vol. 1 Book 2 Nr 35).
After subduing Arabia, Muhammad set out to take Jihad to what are now Iraq, Syria, the Byzantines and Persians. From the first raids on the Byzantine empire, he encountered significant populations of Jews and Christians. Spencer explains that from this point Muhammad declared that Jews and Christians were entitled to special consideration as ‘People of the Book’. They had three choices: convert to Islam, submit to Islamic rule and pay the special poll tax jizya, (They must pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued: Qur’an 9:38-39) or be slaughtered. The jizyabecame a form of Mafia protection racket which then financed Islam’s further expansion.
After Muhamad’s death the Arab armies swept out of Arabia with immense force and embarked on a series of conquests unparalleled in human history for their rapidity and scope. Spencer’s history records the years from 632 to 661 as the Golden Age, according to Muslim scholars. The jihad gave them almost all of Syria, entry to Jerusalem, Armenia, Cyprus and Egypt.
After a rapid subjugation of the former Roman colonies of northern Africa, the eighth century saw the launch of Muslim forces under a freed Berber slave, Tariq ibn Ziyad, across the strait to Gibraltar (Derivation: the mountain of Tariq) to confront the Visigoth rule in the Iberian peninsula. To focus his troops on conquest, he ordered all their boats to be burned.
I first came to understand the myth of an idyllic multi-cultural, tolerant society in the Moors’ occupation of Spain by reading the sacred texts recorded in The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism. This anthology of primary sources by Andrew Bostom traced the systemic Jewish dhimmitude under the Ottomans, and the Qur’an-sanctioned oppression ever since. So it was no surprise to find Spencer debunking the myth of multicultural convivencia in al-Andalusia, where Jews and Christians supposedly lived in mutually beneficial harmony with their Muslim overlords. Again, the jizya was the basis for subjugation. The occupation was swift, penetrating and brutal.
We don’t need to take Spencer’s word. Professor Dario Fernandez-Morera of Northwest University had already detailed the reality in his Myth of the Andalusian Paradise. Spain, he explained, was a violent society, of religious and cultural repression. Internecine conflict raged between the Umayyad caliphs and the Abbassids, and later the Berber Almoravids of Morocco. A Christian army that opposed this last invasion was routed; the Muslims beheaded the corpses of their enemies and arranged the heads into piles. The muezzins then climbed on top of the piles of heads to call the Muslims to prayer.
Even when Jews and Christians were not facing active persecution, as dhimmis (subsidiary citizens) they could be lawfully killed or sold into slavery under the Sharia. “Satan has gained the mastery over them, and caused them to forget God’s Remembrance. Those are Satan’s party; why, Satan’s party, surely they are the losers.” (Qur’an 58:20). The world tends to forget that France and the rest of Europe were saved from invasion in the Spanish jihad of 732 only by Charles Martel’s victory at the Battle of Tours. The same year, 711, that Tariq ibn Ziyad invaded Spain, the Islamic governor of Iraq sent a force into Sindh, now part of Pakistan. It was the start of the jihad conquest of India that lasted, intermittently for the next seven centuries, and has been largely overlooked by Western historians. It took tens, if not hundreds of millions of lives.
The Hindus, Jains and Buddhists the general Muhammad ibn Qasim encountered in Hindustan were not ‘People of the Book’, so no jizya could be demanded from them. Their choice was to convert to Islam, or face the sword of Islam. Hindu temples were considered centres of idolatry; thousands were destroyed. Revered idols of gold and precious stones were smashed and plundered. Spencer explains the viciousness of the invasion with the story of the punishment of ibn Qasim himself, despite his victories. When he sent the daughters of the king of Sindh as a gift of sex slaves to the Iraqi governor, one of the girls defended herself by saying she had already been raped by ibn Qasim. Enraged at being sent second-hand goods, he ordered the general to be shipped home in a rawhide sack. When he arrived, he was already dead.
The occupation of India was renewed in successive jihads – in the tenth, twelfth and fourteenth centuries. These included the seventeen large-scale jihad incursions into the Subcontinent by Mahmud of Ghazni. Over thirty years in the tenth century he converted thousands of temples into mosques. He met resistance when trying to subdue Gujarat, and 50,000 were killed. An account by an Islamic historian of Ghazni’s attack on Thanessar in Hindustan described the blood of the infidels as flowing so copiously that the stream was discoloured and people were unable to drink from it. The jihad in India continued under Muhammad Ghori, Qutbuddin Aibak, Shamsuddin Iltutmish and Jalaluddin Khalji, each responsible for tens of thousands slaughtered or sold into slavery.
There was one benefit only for civilization from the successive jihads in India. Hindu mathematicians had been the first to numeralise the zero, a concept the Arabs adopted, leading to the revolutionary numeral system 0-9, we know as Arabic, the foundation of modern mathematics.
As the jihad pressed into Europe -, Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia, Macedonia, Albania and Croatia – it became inevitably the turn of Constantinople, the eastern pillar of Christendom. In 1339, the Byzantine emperor Andronicus III appealed to Pope Benedict XII to heal the schism between the churches, and help organize a crusade against the approaching Ottomans. His appeal was rejected. Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453.
Spencer draws a bitter comparison between that suicidal lack of resolve and modern refusal to recognise the threat of Islam: “Not until the days of Pope Francis would the See of Rome have an occupant more useful to the jihad force than Benedict XII”, he writes.
There are some surprises in the book. Suleiman the Magnificent’s failed siege of Vienna in 1529 is well known, but less mentioned in many histories is the subsequent attempt on the city by Mehmet IV. This ended in a crushing defeat by a Polish army led by Jan Sobieski in 1683 which led to the retreat of the Ottomans from the Balkans. A bigger surprise was the extent of the ravaging by the Barbary Pirates. A terrorist maritime force in the Mediterranean from their base in Libya, they even plundered the southern coasts of England, in the 17th century, burning ships and capturing hundreds of villagers for the African slave trade.
When the pirates attacked American trading ships, Thomas Jefferson’s protests received this response from Tripoli’s ambassador to London:
“Tripoli was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, and written in their Qur’an, that all nations who should not have answered [Islamic] authority were sinners, that it was the Muslim right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
The world jihad declined in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Spencer explains that 1856 was a major turning point when the British and French governments agreed to help the Ottoman empire against Russia only if it abolished the dhimma, the so-called contract of protection for Jews and Christians. But they were still not equal citizens; even today there is no Muslim-majority country in which all faiths have equal rights.
In modern history, the jihad has alternatively ebbed and raged. Spencer enumerates: The Armenian genocide; the foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1928 (“Fight them until there is no fitnah(sedition) and worship is for Allah” : Qur’an 2:193); the Saudi embrace of Wahabism and their financing of mosques and madrassas all over the world; the PLO and attacks on the Jewish state (“Drive them out from where they drove you out”: Qur’an 2.191); the Iranian revolution (Ruhollah Khomeini: “Islam’s Holy War is a struggle against idolatry, sexual deviation, plunder, repression and cruelty…But those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Island wants to conquer the whole world.”); Osama Bin Laden’s al-Quaeda (The Base); the Chechnya jihad against Russia; the September 11, 2001 attacks, and finally “The Promise of Allah”, the audacious attempt from 2014 to 2017 to restore the caliphate – The Islamic State.
After each reverse, Islam has found new means to continue the Jihad. The 30,000 foreign fighters from a hundred countries who had joined the caliphate in Iraq and Syria, returned home to individualise the struggle. Massacres and atrocities flourished all over the West, followed by candlelight prayer vigils and flower carpets as politicians blamed unspecified “terrorists” and appeased immigrants.
The response to this epic expose of Islam’s great game plan to conquer the world for sharia was to denounce Robert Spencer as an Islamophobe and his book as ‘hate speech’. The radical left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center in the U.S. pressured Visa and Mastercard to block all donations to the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and to cut off Spencer’s fund-raising. There were attempts by supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood to stop Amazon selling his book. But that’s quite tame compared with the Brotherhood’s global objective. As Mohammed Morsi, the Brotherhood’s candidate in the Egyptian presidential campaign of 2012, declared:
“The Qur’an is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal …”
Spencer’s history demonstrates why the recurring terrorist atrocities in Western cities perpetrated by Muslims should not be dismissed as mere “lone wolf” attacks by deranged individuals. Individual efforts they may be, but they are explicit responses to Islam’s militant missionary movement – its age-old call for jihad against the kafirs (unbelievers). As for the so-called ‘moderate’ Muslims who make up the bulk of that group in Western societies, they are either ignorant, apathetic or complacently breeding, while waiting for their militant brothers to make the running. Brothers like Hamza Abbas, one of the quartet allegedly planning the Christmas 2016 attack in Melbourne: “I have pledged my allegiance to ISIS. I do want to destroy your nation.”
In the 700 years since the Ottoman empire threatened Constantinople, nothing has changed except the willingness of western leaders to recognise the threat Islam poses to their societies. In the 1390s, Roman Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus responded thus to Muslim scholars anxious to convert him to Islam:
“Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Peace, in Islamic terms, comes only with submission.
Radical Muslims Behind 84 Percent of Terror Killings in the West, 67 Percent Foreign-Born
Islamists were responsible for a massive 84.27 per cent of terror killings in the West in 2017, with 66.67 per cent of the perpetrators coming to their target country from abroad.
The number of foreign-born radical Islamic terrorists carrying out attacks in Western countries was up substantially from 2016, when 40.54 per cent of attackers struck outside their country of origin, according to a report by the Henry Jackson Society.
Europe was the Western region most impacted in 2017, suffering some 75 per cent of all terrorist violence, compared to 22.06 per cent for North America, and 2.94 per cent for Australasia.
The United Kingdom was the worst affected individual country in the Western World, taking 19.12 per cent of terror-related incidents — up from 9.26 per cent in 2016 — and a remarkable 40.45 per cent of terror-related fatalities.
The proportion of terrorism attributed to Islamists was down somewhat despite an increase in total Islamist attacks, due in large part to a increase in incidents logged as ‘far-right’.
The far-right was reportedly responsible for 20.59 per cent share of terrorism in the West in 2017 — quadruple its 2016 share of 5.56 per cent.
Unlike the majority of mainstream commentators and politicians, however, the Henry Jackson Society also highlighted the threat from the far-left, whichaccounted for the same 20.59 per cent share of terrorism as the far-right in 2017 , and a 16.67 per cent share in 2016 — meaning it accounted for a larger proportion of terrorist violence over the two-year period.
Even more unusually, the Henry Jackson Society makes the effort to record ‘Black Supremacist’ terrorism, which accounted for a more modest 3.28 per cent share of terrorist violence across 2016-17.
Black Supremacist attacks were mostly aimed at police, but a shooting in Fresno, California, which targetted white people indiscriminately is also included — although that attack also had something of an Islamist bent to it, with Kori Ali Muhammad shouting “Allahu Akbar” as he struck.
BIBLE OF THE MUSLIM TERRORIST:
“The Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs
throughout the world where young boys are brainwashed into becoming fanatical
foot-soldiers for the petrodollar-flush Saudis and other emirs of the Persian
Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
"slay the unbelievers wherever you find them"
Koran 3:21 "Muslims must not take the infidels as friends"
Koran 5:33 "Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam"
Koran 8:12 "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other
than the Koran"
Koran 8:60 " Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the
Koran 8:65 "The unbelievers are stupid, urge all Muslims to fight
Koran 9:5 "When the opportunity arises, kill the infidels wherever you
Koran 9:123 "Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood"
Koran 22:19 "Punish the unbelievers with garments of fire, hooked iron
rods, boiling water, melt their skin and bellies"
Koran 47:4 "Do not hanker for peace with the infidels, behead them when
you catch them".
“The tentacles of the Islamist hydra have deeply
penetrated the world. The Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood poses a clear
threat in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood also wages its deadly campaign through
its dozens of well-established and functioning branches all over the world.”
Wahhabis finance thousands of madrassahs throughout the world where young boys
are brainwashed into becoming fanatical foot-soldiers for the petrodollar-flush
Saudis and other emirs of the Persian Gulf.” AMIL IMANI
will take advantage of their immigration policy to infiltrate them.
will use their own welfare system to provide us with food, housing, schooling,
and health care, while we out breed them and plot against them. We will
Caliphate on their dime.
will use political correctness as a weapon. Anyone who criticizes us, we will
take the opportunity to grandstand and curry favor from the media and Democrats
and loudly accuse our critics of being an Islamophobe.
will use their own discrimination laws against them and slowly introduce Sharia
Law into their culture..
“THE WAHHABIS FINANCE THOUSANDS OF
MADRASSAHS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD WHERE
YOUNG BOYS ARE BRAINWASHED INTO BECOMING
FANATICAL FOOT-SOLDIERS FOR THE PETRODOLLAR-
FLUSH SAUDIS AND OTHER EMIRS OF THE PERSIAN
GULF.” AMIL IMANI
TRUMP A “GODSEND” – SAYS GLAZOV’S NEW BOOK, "JIHADIST PSYCHOPATH"
Jihadist Psychopath, which is Amazon's #1 New Release in the “Medical Mental Illness” category,offers a unique perspective on the terror war. Like no other work, it unveils the world of psychopathy and reveals, step by step, how Islamic Supremacists are duplicating the sinister methodology of psychopaths who routinely charm, seduce, capture, and devour their prey.
Jihadist Psychopath unveils how every element of the formula by which the psychopath subjugates his victim is used by the Islamic Supremacist to ensnare and subjugate non-Muslims. And in the same way that the victim of the psychopath is complicit in his own destruction, so too Western civilization is now embracing and enabling its own conquest and consumption.
One of Dr. Glazov's strongest messages in his new book (as he discusses in his new video) is his reference to President Trump as a providential “Godsend.” Glazov documents and unveils how, during this dire hour for America and for western civilization, and after the miserable catastrophe of the Obama administration, America’s president is pushing back a pernicious enemy.
Dr. Glazov's new book delivers a ground-breaking exposé of how the Jihadist Psychopath has successfully built his totalitarian plantation in the West -- a plantation on which many westerners, including many of our leaders, are now enslaved and dutifully following the Jihadist Psychopath's orders. Glazov outlines the frameworks of this tyrannical plantation and shows how those who are unwillingly trapped on it, and who yearn for freedom, can best escape. The author reveals (as he explains in his video), how the Unholy Alliance is simply in panic mode at the prospect of people waking up to the existence of the Jihadist Psychopath's plantation and shedding their fear of the smears they will face for leaving it.
We are extremely honored to share that, as the front cover of this new book reveals, Dennis Prager has affirmed that Jihadist Psychopath is "...one of the most important books of the present time."
President Trump's National Security Adviser, John Bolton, has also given glowing praise. As Dr. Glazov discusses in his video, John Bolton says about Jihadist Psychopath:
Hard as it is to believe, many in the West simply will not take the time and trouble to understand the threat posed by radical Islamicist terrorism. James Burnham once wrote of a similar problem with international Communism in his masterful Suicide of the West. Now, Jamie Glazov has written this century's counterpart to Burnham's classic work and will doubtless upset those determined not to analyze for themselves the nature of the underlying phenomenon.
With a Foreword written by Michael Ledeen, advance praise also comes from Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Steve Emerson and many other titans and scholars in the international arena. (See Amazon page for many of the blurbs).
It has been widely asserted by many
psychologists that human beings act upon their beliefs. Well, if this is true, we can deduce that beliefs direct people
in life, and while some beliefs are harmless, some are the motivating force for
good, others are delusional, misguided, and even outright dangerous.
In my opinion, every version of the belief
called “Islam” ranges from the delusional to the dangerous.
Islam is a fantasy, birthed by Muhammad’s
delusion that he relayed to his first wife and employer, Khadija. Greatly
frightened, he told Khadija that he was visited by a jinn (devil) in the Hira
cave. Khadija comforted the distraught man by assuring him that the episode was
Allah’s way of choosing him as his messenger.
Muhammad believed his rich wife/employer,
who was 15 years his senior and the delusion became a belief: Islam. Remarkably
enough, under the early tutelage of Khadija, Muhammad succeeded in attracting
influential followers. Before long, the movement gathered more and more power
through violent campaigns, and the faith was taken to new people and foreign
This impressive delusion, Islam, presently
has in its stranglehold in over a billion humans, posing an existential threat to
Islam is rooted in the primitive tribal
mentality of “Us against Them,” “We the righteous against the heathens,” “We
the servants submissive to the Great Allah against the rebellious enemies of
Allah.” Islam is a polarizer. Islam is an enemy-maker. To Islam, a non-Muslim
is a combatant against Allah, and he is fair game to be subjugated and killed.
When some billion and a half people adhere to the pathological belief of Islam
and use it as their marching orders for life, the rest of humanity can ignore
the threat only at its own peril.
After 1400 years, Islam is still on a
campaign of conquest throughout the known world. Hordes of life-in-hand
foot-soldier fanatical Muslims are striving to kill and get killed. All they
want is the opportunity to discharge their homicidal-suicidal impulse, on their
way to Allah’s promised glorious afterlife. And in the background, granting the
foot-soldiers’ wishes, are their handlers, the puppeteers, who pull the strings
and detonate these human bombs.
Those who cherish life must recognize these
emissaries of death, what makes them, what motivates them, and how best to
defend against them. The campaign of death waged by these Islamic jihadists, be
he a puppet or a puppeteer, is energized by the belief of delectable rewards
that await the faithful implementer of Allah’s dictates.
Through a highly effective indoctrination,
the jihadist has come to believe firmly in Islam’s absolute delusion. He
believes that Allah is the one and only supreme creator of the heavens and the
Earth; that it is his duty and privilege, to abide by Allah’s will and carry
out his plans at all costs. He believes firmly in a gloriously wonderful
immortal afterlife in paradise, for which a martyr’s death is the surest
quickest admission. Although the dominating theme of the delusion is
quasi-spiritual, the promised rewards of the afterlife awaiting the martyr are
sensual and material.
All the things and activities that the
jihadist desires and cannot attain or practice, and rejects in his earthly
life, will be purified and proffered to him in the paradise of the next life.
Thus goes the delusion.
As I have asserted in my previous articles,
it is important to understand that the human mind is not a perfect discerner of
objective reality. Reality is in the eye of the beholder. The outside world
only supplies bits and pieces of raw material that the mind puts together to
form its reality. Depending on the type and number of bits and pieces that a
given mind receives, its reality can be very different from that of another
mind. The more prescribed and homogeneous a group, the greater is the group’s
consensual reality, since the members share much in common, experiential input
and reinforce each other’s’ mindset.
Thus members of a given religious order,
for instance, tend to think much more similarly to one another than to members
of other groups with different experiential histories. Various approximations
of the objective reality, therefore, rule the mind. The degree to which these
approximations deviate from the larger group’s consensual reality determines
its delusional extent and severity.
A methamphetamine user’s reality
is often distorted in a different way. Under the influence of the drug, an
intense paranoia overtakes him. His reality is dominated by the belief that one
or more people are lurking about to harm or kill him. He may wield a deadly
weapon, going from room to room, from closet to closet, in search of the
If you believe that a bug is camping deeply
inside your body, then you might go ahead and try to dig the non-existent bug
out. If you believe that people are lurking around the house to harm or kill
you, you go after them before they get to you. If you believe that all the
troubles of the world are due to the evil-doings of the non-Muslims who war
against Allah, then you do all you can to fight and kill them, particularly
since Allah tells you to do so in the Quran. The drug-induced delusions are
They are dramatic and usually transitory,
while religiously-based implantation of ideas program the mind with lasting
delusions. Delusions, even when they are at great variance from the objective
reality, can rule the mind without the need for drugs, or because of
neurological dysfunctions or other factors. The young and the less-educated are
most vulnerable to believe the claims of charlatans, con artists, and cunning
clerics, as truth and reality.
The repeated intense indoctrination of the
children even changed the perception of some of the charlatan mullahs or the
imams, who believed their own lies and rushed to their own death clinging to
trinkets. Hence some of the puppeteers, in this instance, became puppets
themselves. Such are the folly and fallibility of the human mind.
It is, therefore, understandable that many
of the higher-up Islamic puppeteers, who are usually brainwashed from early
childhood, devote their fortunes and persons to the implementation of their
deeply ingrained delusions. Deluded by the threats and promises of Islam,
Muslims, rich or poor, vie with one another in furthering the violent cause of
Many non-Muslims are also victims of a
different, yet just as deadly, delusion. They believe that Islam is a religion
of peace, that only a small minority of Muslims are jihadists, and that Muslims
can be reasoned with to abandon the Quran-mandated elimination of
non-believers. These well-meaning simpletons are just as deluded as the fanatic
jihadists by refusing to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and
not abide by the dictates of the Quran.
Calling Mohammed a Pedophile Not Covered by Free Speech, European Court Rules
Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was convicted under Austria’s penal code in 2011 for “denigrating the teachings of a legally recognized religion.” (Screen capture: YouTube)
(CNSNews.com) – Europe’s top human rights court has ruled that comments about Mohammed having pedophilic tendencies are not covered by the right to freedom of expression, agreeing with the assessment of courts in Austria that the remarks constituted “an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam which could stir up prejudice and threaten religious peace.”
A seven-judge European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) panel in Strasbourg concluded that the Austrian courts had “carefully balanced the applicant’s right to freedom of expression with the rights of others to have their religious feelings protected, and to have religious peace preserved in Austrian society.”
Thursday’s decision came nine years after Elizabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, an Austrian political scientist and activist, held a seminar in Vienna where among things she criticized the treatment of women in Islam. The topic of Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha, the youngest of his dozen wives and concubines, came up.
According to Islamic texts, the 7th century Arabian who founded Islam was betrothed to Aisha when she was six, and the marriage was consummated when she was nine.
The court record quotes Sabaditsch-Wolff as having said that Mohammed “liked to do it with children,” (other translations of the German comment render it “had a thing for little girls”) and saying, “A 56-year-old and a six-year-old? … What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?”
In 2011, Sabaditsch-Wolff was convicted under Austria’s penal code for “denigrating the teachings of a legally recognized religion” and fined 480 euros (about $546), plus costs. She was acquitted on a charge of incitement.
Sabaditsch-Wolff appealed the decision, but a higher court in Austria upheld it.
In June 2012 the case was lodged with the ECHR, which hears allegations of breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights. Sabaditsch-Wolff complained her freedom of expression rights under the convention had been violated.
She said the Austrian courts had failed to address the substance of the statements in question, in the light of her right to freedom of expression.
If they had done so, Sabaditsch-Wolff argued, they would have qualified that as value judgments based on facts, rather than as mere value judgments.
The ECHR judges disagreed.
They said although people must tolerate the denial by others of their religious beliefs, in cases where comments are “likely to incite religious intolerance” a state might legitimately consider them to be “incompatible with respect for the freedom of thought, conscience and religion and take proportionate restrictive measures.”
The judges also said the subject matter “was of a particularly sensitive nature,” and that the authorities in Austria were “in a better position to evaluate which statements were likely to disturb the religious peace in their country.”
Muslims, like these Bangledeshis praying during Ramadan, do not believe Mohammed was divine. (Photo: OIC/Flickr)
‘Not a worthy subject of worship’
Earlier one Austrian court declared, in a ruling cited by the ECHR on Thursday, that Sabaditsch-Wolff’s had wrongfully accused Mohammed of pedophilic tendencies because he remained married to Aisha until he died – at which time she was 18, “and had therefore passed the age of puberty.”
Curiously, the ECHR judges endorsed the Austrian courts’ findings that the comments “had not been made in an objective manner aiming at contributing to a debate of public interest, but could only be understood as having been aimed at demonstrating that Mohammed was not a worthy subject of worship.”
(In fact, while Muslims revere Mohammed they do not view him as divine – nor did he claim to be – and they strongly dispute that they “worship” him at all. The Islamic declaration of faith, the shahada, states, “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger.”)
Furthermore, the judges agreed with the Austrian courts that the applicant “must have been aware that her statements were partly based on untrue facts and apt to arouse indignation in others.”
“The national courts found that [Sabaditsch-Wolff’s] had subjectively labelled Mohammed with pedophilia as his general sexual preference, and that she failed to neutrally inform her audience of the historical background, which consequently did not allow for a serious debate on that issue.”
Although the ruling was now been handed down, parties to any case have a three-month period to request that a decision be referred to the ECHR’s five-judge Grand Chamber, which will decide whether a case deserves further examination. If so, it will hear the case and deliver a final judgment.
Assertions about the age of Aisha at the consummation of her marriage to Mohammed are based on what scholars view as authoritative Hadiths (sayings or traditions ascribed to Mohammed), including several by the 9th century scholar Bukhari.
One of them (Vol. 5, Book 58, No. 234) reads in part: “Narrated by Aisha: The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years) … Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.”
Although there is some dispute about the ages of some of Mohammed’s other wives and concubines, some reports say the youngest after Aisha were Mulaykah, 13, and Safiyah, about 16. At the time of their marriages Mohammed was reportedly 57-58 years-old. Other wives and concubines are reported to have ranged in age from about 19 to 55.
Seven men of Pakistani heritage from South Yorkshire were found guilty of sexual offences against underage girls in the latest abuse trial following the inquiry into the Rotherham grooming gang scandal.
Salah Ahmed El-Hakam, 39, Asif Ali, 33, Tanweer Ali, 37, Mohammed Imran Ali Akhtar, 37, Nabeel Kurshid, 35, Iqlak Yousaf, 34, and a seventh man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were convicted on Monday of grooming and sexually abusing five underage girls between 1998 and 2005, reports the BBC.
An eighth man, Ajmal Rafiq, 39, was found not guilty of indecent assault and false imprisonment.
During the trial, the victims revealed the extent of the abuse, with one survivor telling the court that she had been raped by “at least 100 Asian men” by the age of 16.
Another had told the jury she had been bitten and raped in Sherwood Forest by two men after they fed her drugs.
One girl had fallen pregnant and had an abortion by the age of 14, while another had given birth by the age of 15, her son fathered by her abuser.
The prosecutor had told the jury, during the eight-week trial, that the gang had targetted the five girls because they “were easy targets” from broken homes who “wanted to be loved” and were “lured by the excitement of friendship with older Asian youths”.
The jury also heard that the victims were “frequently in cars [with their rapists] stopped by the police but this did not deter the abusers”.
The convictions are the latest to follow on from the National Crime Agency’s (NCA) Operation Stovewood — the country’s largest law enforcement investigation into grooming gang-based child sexual exploitation (CSE).
Operation Stovewood came about as a result of the 2014 Jay Report which found that 1,400 — estimates revised to up to 1,510 last year — mainly white, working-class girls had been groomed and raped by gangs of mostly Pakistani-origin Muslim men between 1997 and 2013. The report also exposed the culture in police and social services of political correctness and of not believing victims that allowed the abuse to go on for so long.
This is just the latestconviction of a Pakistani-heritage grooming gang from Rotherham, with another recent trial ending in the sentencing of 20 abusers in Huddersfield.
Home Secretary Sajid Javid — himself of Muslim, Pakistani heritage — was criticised by leftists for his reaction to the conviction of the Huddersfield rape gang when he condemned them as “sick Asian paedophiles”.
In an interview with The Times on Saturday, Mr Javid said that Pakistani-heritage child gang rapists had “disgraced” his ethnic heritage, admitting that “[there] must be some cultural connection, some reason”.
In July, the Home Secretary ordered research into the ethnic and cultural component of grooming gangs and has vowed to fight “uncivilised” forced marriage in the UK.
The full details of the latest convictions are as follows:
Mohammed Imran Akhtar (37), of Rotherham, was found guilty of one count of rape, three counts of indecent assault, sexual assault, procuring a girl to have unlawful sex with another, aiding and abetting Tanweer Ali to commit rape.
Asif Ali (33), of Rotherham, was acquitted of one count of indecent assault and found guilty of two counts of indecent assault.
Tanweer Ali (37), of Rotherham, was found guilty of two counts of rape, two counts of indecent assault, and one count of false imprisonment.
Salah El-Hakam (39), of Sheffield, was found guilty of one count of rape.
Nabeel Kurshid (35), of Rotherham, was found guilty of two counts of rape and one count of indecent assault.
Iqlak Yousaf (34), of Rotherham, was found guilty of two counts of indecent assault and two counts of rape.
One man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was acquitted of abducting a child and rape but found guilty of two counts of rape.
The seven are due to be sentenced November 16th.
The Mexican Invasion & Occupation