America Faces No Greater Threat Than Joe Biden and the Democrat Party. Their Assault to Our Borders Is As Great As Their Assault to Free Speech and Free Elections
Thursday, August 17, 2023
MUSLIM GLOBAL TERRORISM - 4 Churches Burned by Pakistani Muslim Mobs Over Koran "Bibles have been desecrated and Christians have been tortured."
Palestinian Journalist: We Have Always Hated the Evil Jews
A Palestinian journalist, Radwan Abdullah, does not mince words: We Muslims do not merely hate Israelis; we hate all the Jews, who have been our enemies since the beginning of Islam. It’s useful to have such an explosion of candor, since so many in the West keep thinking that the enmity of the Palestinians and other Arabs can be solved by territorial concessions from Israel. But there is nothing the Israelis can do to end that Muslim Arab hate, except by disappearing. More on Abdullah’s article can be found here: “Palestinian Writer Says the Antisemitism Part Out Loud,” by Elder of Ziyon, Algemeiner, August 10, 2023:
Radwan Abdullah, a well-known Palestinian writer, has an article in Nidaal al-Watan, where he freely admits that he makes no distinction between Jews and Israelis. According to him, Jews are just as despicable today as they were in Mohammed’s time:
It is noted in many of the writings of media figures, and Arab intellectuals in general, that the hostility of the Jews to the Arabs and Muslims is limited to the occupation of Palestine. They ignore or forget the Jewish history of hostility to Islam and Muslims since the first cradle of Islam in Medina.
This thing, the enmity of course, which the Messenger of God Muhammad, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, suffered from continued, even at intermittent periods, between the Jewish plots of the Prophet’s time, to their multiple misfortunes in more than one Arab country, with the incitement of states and emirates against other states and emirates, as Arab history has proven in several previous stages up to the catastrophe of Palestine and the subsequent massacres and calamities that they perpetrated in Palestine, Syria, Egypt and in several other Arab countries. They take advantage of their multiple nationalities and use their hateful malice and cunning to corrupt the land, starting from the areas of their presence in the Arab and regional countries and even the rest of the world. The Jewish hostility to Arabs and Muslims began since the dawn of Islam and was completed at the collapse of the Ottoman Sultanate, leading to the occupation of our dear homeland, Palestine….
It is the Jews of Israel who have had to fight three wars for their very survival, in 1948, 1967, and 1973, as well as a dozen lesser campaigns against the terror groups Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Israel never wanted war with the Arabs, but had it repeatedly thrust upon them. The “Jewish hostility” to “Arabs and Muslims” was always, in fact, a justified reaction to the hatred of Jews that the texts and teachings of Islam encourage. Radwan Abdullah has things backwards. It is not the texts and teachings of the Jews that are full of hatred for Muslims, but the texts and teachings of Islam that preach murderous hatred of the Jews. It was Muhammad’s Muslims who waged war on the Jewish tribes of Medina; Muhammad himself took part in decapitating between 600 and 900 members of the Jewish Banu Qurayza tribe. In his useful compilation Robert Spencer notes that “the Qur’an depicts the Jews as inveterately evil and bent on destroying the wellbeing of the Muslims. They are the strongest of all people in enmity toward the Muslims (5:82); as fabricating things and falsely ascribing them to Allah (2:79; 3:75, 3:181); claiming that Allah’s power is limited (5:64); loving to listen to lies (5:41); disobeying Allah and never observing his commands (5:13); disputing and quarreling (2:247); hiding the truth and misleading people (3:78); staging rebellion against the prophets and rejecting their guidance (2:55); being hypocritical (2:14, 2:44); giving preference to their own interests over the teachings of Muhammad (2:87); wishing evil for people and trying to mislead them (2:109); feeling pain when others are happy or fortunate (3:120); being arrogant about their being Allah’s beloved people (5:18); devouring people’s wealth by subterfuge (4:161); slandering the true religion and being cursed by Allah (4:46); killing the prophets (2:61); being merciless and heartless (2:74); never keeping their promises or fulfilling their words (2:100); being unrestrained in committing sins (5:79); being cowardly (59:13-14); being miserly (4:53); being transformed into apes and pigs for breaking the Sabbath (2:63-65; 5:59-60; 7:166); and more.”
The classic Qur’anic commentators do not soften the Qur’an’s words against Jews, but only add fuel to the fire. Ibn Kathir explained Qur’an 2:61 (“They were covered with humiliation and misery; they drew on themselves the wrath of Allah”) this way: “This Ayah [verse] indicates that the Children of Israel were plagued with humiliation, and that this will continue, meaning that it will never cease. They will continue to suffer humiliation at the hands of all who interact with them, along with the disgrace that they feel inwardly.” Another Middle Ages commentator of influence, Abdallah ibn Umar al-Baidawi, explains the same verse this way: “The Jews are mostly humiliated and wretched either of their own accord, or out of coercion of the fear of having their jizya [punitive tax] doubled.”
Ibn Kathir notes Islamic traditions that predict that at the end of the world, “the Jews will support the Dajjal (False Messiah), and the Muslims, along with ‘Isa [Jesus], son of Mary, will kill the Jews.” The idea in Islam that the end times will be marked by Muslims killing Jews comes from the prophet Muhammad himself, who said, “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. ‘O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.’” This is, not unexpectedly, a favorite motif among contemporary jihadists.
Radwan Abdullah continues:
Despite this, many Arabs and Muslims think and may believe that limiting the hostility to the Jews to the occupation of Palestine makes the occupation of Palestine a Palestinian issue only, as if the Palestinians alone are concerned with defending Palestine and perhaps all Arabs and Muslims. This is contrary to the truth.. Since we all know that the occupation of Palestine is intended to strike our Arab unity and our Islamic nation, in addition to displacing our people and stealing their homeland and its Christian and Islamic sanctities, and that the occupation of Palestine is nothing but an extension of the crusaders’ fierce campaigns against the Arab nation and Islam together, and it is actually an extension of the hostility of {the]Banu Qurayza…
From the very earliest years of Islam, the Jews were subject to the malevolent hatred of Muslims. The Jewish tribe of the Banu Qurayza in Medina was unwilling to submit to the early Muslims; the Muslims, therefore, felt justified in attacking them — murdering the men and enslaving the women. Muhammad always found the Jews the most steadfast in their opposition to him. Among the three most famous mockers of Muhammad whom his followers murdered — Asma bint Marwan, Abu ‘Afak, and Ka’b ibn-Al-Ashraf — the latter two were Jews.
As the Muslims saw it, the Prophet had offered the Jewish tribes the truth of Islam, and they had turned him down. The Jews under Muslim rule had only three options: to convert to Islam, to be put to death, or to accept the permanent onerous status of dhimmis, who had a host of economic, political, and social disabilities imposed on them, of which the most crushing was the jizyah, a capitation tax which allowed Jews to practice their religion without being subject to attack by Muslims — in essence, a form of extortion.
Those Arab propagandists who attempt to convince us that “if only” Israel were to make territorial concessions to the “Palestinians” that the Muslim Arabs would live in peace with the Jews in their much reduced state, are hoping we will ignore the contents of the Quran and hadith, ignore the 1400-year history of Muslim violence against the Jews who, as Infidels, are described in the Qur’an as “the most vile of created beings.” Radwan Abdullah is perfectly willing not to deny, but to openly state, the truth: the Muslim Arabs have hated Jews, and not merely Zionists, since the very beginning of Islam. As far as the Believers are concerned, the Jews have always been been evil, scheming thieves of Arab lands, intent on spreading “corruption” in the land. And the Muslim war against them must continue until they are everywhere overcome.
It is good to have an Arab writer who admits the truth.
Reader Interactions
4 Churches Burned by Pakistani Muslim Mobs Over Koran
"Bibles have been desecrated and Christians have been tortured."
Words fail me as I write this. We, Bishops, Priests and lay people are deeply pained and distressed at the Jaranwala incident in the Faisalabad District in Pakistan. A church building is being burnt as I type this message. Bibles have been desecrated and Christians have been… pic.twitter.com/xruE83NPXL
In recent months we’ve had incessant wailing and violence because someone in Sweden burned a copy of the Koran which is considered a holy book within Islam and by apologists for the ideology.
Several churches were set on fire by a rampaging mob in eastern Pakistan on Wednesday after a Christian family was accused of blasphemy, officials said.
Hundreds of people armed with sticks and rocks stormed the predominantly Christian area in Faisalabad city, police in the area told AFP.
Images on social media showed smoke rising from the church buildings and people setting fire to furniture that had been dragged from them.
The Muslim pretext for the attack was the usual one in totalitarian theocracies… blasphemy. Someone had supposedly burned or red-penciled a Koran and the howling mobs quickly gathered.
Bishop Azad Marshall, President Bishop of the Church of Pakistan, said that the priests and ordinary people were deeply pained and distressed at the Jaranwala incident. “A church building is being burnt as I type this message,” he wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “Bibles have been desecrated and Christians have been tortured and harassed having been falsely accused of violating the Holy Quran.”
Several churches were vandalised on Wednesday in Pakistan’s Faisalabad over blasphemy allegations. Three churches – Salvation Army Church, United Presbyterian Church, Allied Foundation Church – situated in the Isa Nagri area of Jaranwala tehsil were ransacked by the extremists, a pastor told Pakistan-based Dawn News. Imran Bhatti, the pastor of the Jaranwala tehsil, said that the house of a Christian cleaner, accused of blasphemy, was also demolished.
Punjab police chief Usman Anwar said the police were negotiating with the protesters and the area had been cordoned off.
The official said that efforts were underway to contain the situation by engaging with peace committees and police across the province had been activated. He also informed that the protesters had also turned against the assistant commissioner of the area, a member of the Christian community. The assistant commissioner has been evacuated, Anwar told Dawn. The Christian leaders, however, alleged that the police remained silent spectators.
Although Pakistan was founded in 1947 with the intention of creating a tolerant and egalitarian country, religious communities have continued to face discrimination.
Last month, Naveed Walter, the President of Human Rights Focus Pakistan said that the population of minorities in Pakistan has come down to 3 per cent from 23 per cent since its independence in 1947.
“There were multiple reasons behind this. One of the main reasons was when Pakistan was declared an Islamic country. In 1973, when the constitution was established, in Article 2 it was stated that Islam shall be a state religion. In Article 41 (2) it was declared that the President shall always be a Muslim always. Article 91 restated that the Prime Minister shall be a Muslim always. There were multiple amendments in the constitution in the 1980s when the dictator Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq made the amendments in the constitution as per the Sharia law”, said Naveed Walter.
The human rights activist said that the blasphemy law was introduced in the country to target religious minorities. A large number of people have been killed and many languished in jail across Pakistan since its introduction.
This is the reality of Islam. It’s already happening in Europe under the pressure of Islamic migration. And it’s coming to America.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Reader Interactions
Pakistan: Muslim Mob of 10,000 People Burns Down Hundreds of Christian Homes, Churches, over ‘Blasphemy’
A mob reportedly made of up as many as 10,000 men began burning down, looting, and otherwise violently assaulting Christian communities in Jaranwala, Pakistan, on Wednesday in response to reports that a Christian man had allegedly desecrated a Quran.
The Pakistani newspaper Dawn, citing local Christians in the northern Pakistani region of Punjab, documented the burning down or otherwise complete destruction of at least five churches. The British Asian Christian Association, an international aid group that serves persecuted Christians in Pakistan, reported that the mob destroyed over 500 homes and left “tens of thousands” of Christians homeless.
Muslim mob violence in Pakistan, an officially Islamic state, is common. Islamist mobs often riot when rumors spread of a Christian allegedly desecrating a Quran, insulting the Islamic figure Muhammad, or otherwise offending the religion. Islamists have also rioted over international news, such as riots in support of the Charlie Hebdomassacre of 2015 or riots against France following the beheading of teacher Samuel Paty, which the French government condemned.
Christians are often the targets of such violence and local police rarely intervene effectively, particularly when the mob attacks are triggered by allegations of blasphemy. “Blasphemy” is a crime in the Pakistani penal code, punishable by death when directed at Muhammad personally. Pakistan has never in its history executed a person for blasphemy, but mobs have “extra-judicially” killed or severely injured untold numbers over the alleged crime.
Many of those killed for “blasphemy” are not charged with the crime and little evidence exists that the blasphemy occurred. Christians in Pakistan are disproportionately poor and some accused of “crimes” such as writing on a Quran are illiterate, making the accusations impossible.
The incidents triggered on Wednesday reportedly began when Muslims in Jaranwala began accusing Saleem Masih, a Christian man believed to work as a cleaner, of desecrating a copy of the Quran, the Islamic holy book. According to the British Asian Christian Association, the violence began when Islamic officials used mosques to make community announcements demanding that mobs organize and begin destroying Christian communities in response.
“The affected regions, including Cinema Basti, Christian Town, and Esa Nagar, have witnessed the destruction of over 500 houses,” the organization detailed. “According to reports provided by on-ground volunteers, Pastors Muratib and Moon, a tumultuous mob of approximately 10,000 individuals has wreaked havoc within the Christian towns.”
The Pakistani newspaper Dawn reported that pastors had confirmed the burning down and looting of at least five churches in the community throughout Wednesday.
“Images on social media showed smoke rising from the church buildings and people setting fire to furniture that had been dragged from them. A Christian cemetery was also vandalised, as well as the local government office,” Dawn documented.
Videos from the greater Faisalabad area showed large crowds of men starting fires around churches, looting the homes of Christians, and chanting anti-Christian slogans. In one such video, one police officer appears in front of a crowd of what appears to be hundreds of people, calmly attempting to address the men and being ignored as they continue ransacking what appears to be a residential community.
Bishop Azad Marshall, the president bishop of the Church of Pakistan, posted a message on Twitter on Wednesday stating that churches were burning as he was writing and demanding police take action.
“Words fail me as I write this. We, Bishops, Priests and lay people are deeply pained and distressed at the Jaranwala incident in the Faisalabad District in Pakistan. A church building is being burnt as I type this message,” he wrote. “Bibles have been desecrated and Christians have been tortured and harrased [sic] having been falsely accused of violating the Holy Quran.”
“We cry out for justice and action from law enforcement and those who dispense justice and the safety of all citizens to intervene immediately and assure us that our lives are valuable in our own homeland that has just celebrated independence and freedom,” he demanded.
The mob attacks appear to be ongoing at press time, though local police claim they are organizing a response. Pakistan’s Geo TV cited the information minister for Punjab, Amir Mir, claiming “dozens” of people had been arrested for their participation in the mob attacks and that police believed the eruption of violence was not spontaneous.
“There was a plan to disturb the peace by inciting public sentiments. After the desecration of the Holy Quran, the angry protesters reacted strongly,” Mir claimed, apparently accepting the alleged blasphemy as a fact.
Geo TV added that Mir claimed police were working swiftly to investigate “the tragic incident of the desecration of the holy book” – the Quran, presumably, though Mir did not clarify if he was also investigating Bishop Marshall’s report of desecrations of Bibles.
Mir also astoundingly claimed “no one was injured nor was there any loss of life” in the riots, contradicting the on-the-ground reports from the British Asian Christian Association, which alleged thousands of injuries.
Juliet Chowdhry, Trustee for the British Asian Christian Association, issued a statement accusing the police of doing little to nothing to protect Christian lives.
“Regrettably, there appears to be a distinct absence of law enforcement or military personnel intervening to prevent and defuse this violence,” she said. “Equally concerning is the lack of emergency services or non-governmental organizations offering aid or assistance in these dire circumstances.”
Punjab police chief Usman Anwar said on Wednesday afternoon that the “situation was under control,” according to Dawn.
Caroline Glick, a master of Middle East cultural and political affairs, has developed a brief but forceful overview of the dynamics of the complex negotiations that are going on and have been going on for years between and among the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, Israel, Russia, and other impacted nation-states.
In the background of these meetings that project endless scenarios for the benefit of the concerned parties stands the United Nations which was originally conceived as a world body that would bring conflicts under a united peacekeeping effort that would be respected by the member nation-states. However, the UN has been standing on the sidelines as bilateral, trilateral, and multilateral meetings and negotiations have been taking place among affected parties in the Middle East and elsewhere. So, for example, the UN condemned the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, but has stood on the sidelines helplessly huffing and puffing its displeasure while that war proceeds. This helplessness is largely because Russia is on the Security Council and is thus able to veto any actions taken against itself. Yet, at the same time, the UN keeps up its dogged connection with world government advocates and a few short years ago unanimously agreed upon Agenda 2030, which establishes the goals for a world government, although the words “world government” do not appear in the Agenda document.
It is incredible to see how many liars and phonies occupy center stage in our world. We can see this clearly as we put the microscope of analysis over the procedures and policies of the Middle Eastern power brokers. Iran and Saudi Arabia ostensibly represent two “branches” of Islam -- the former representing the Shi’ite branch and the latter the leading country of the Sunni branch. These two factions have been warring with each other for nearly 1400 years, but they both have in common contempt for the non-Islamic world. This is true even though their great oil wealth would not be possible without the input and engineering know-how of the non-Islamic world -- the oil companies -- who knew how to find and develop the great energy wealth of the Islamic world. These two competing Arab cultures lived in backwards isolation for centuries while the West grew in knowledge, wealth, health, and power. We now depend on their oil, but they depend on the cash flow and prestige that their oil brings into their societies.
Glick in a recent article has embraced the idea of negotiations as the path to resolving the issues that beset the world and the Middle East. The idea of negotiations leading to an official agreement or treaty has a long and dignified history -- it is fundamentally based on a model of rational discourse and the balancing of national interests with common interests. Willingness to compromise is an essential feature of said negotiations. The military strength of the negotiating partners is of course also weighted into the negotiation equation, and more powerful entities such as the USA, the PRC, or Russia may thrust themselves into negotiations among less militarily able countries. This intrusion of great powers into negotiations among weaker parties is of course portrayed as accelerating the peace process and assuring more successful completion of negotiations. But, at another level, it is an aspect of realpolitik where larger powers assert control and make sure that less powerful entities continue to kiss their proverbial a****.
Because of the takeover of Iran by the bloodthirsty ayatollahs in 1979, and their subsequent taking of American hostages, the USA became very much anti-Iran. Iran’s Muslim, ayatollah-governed country believed in the Shi’ite branch of Islam while the Saudis and most of the Muslim world are Sunnis. Their dispute -- from almost the founding of Islam to this day -- is about the basis for the line of succession to leadership in the Islamic world after the death of Muhammed. After 1979, we tended to support the Saudis and the Sunni faction in the Islamic world, which is much larger than the Shi’ite faction. Thus, until President Barack Obama decided to change our orientation and “make peace” with the Iranian Shi’ites, we faced some serious aggressions from Iran, and despite the Obama and Biden overtures, we still do.
In 1983, American marines were attacked by Iranian-backed terrorists in Beirut, Lebanon and 240 of our heroic armed forces were killed. Then in 1996 Americans were killed in an attack on the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Although Iran was officially blamed by a U.S. District Court for the Khobar attack, this writer believes there was probably some Saudi complicity. After the attack, the Saudis refused to extradite those arrested for the attack.
During the years 1980 to 1988, war was waged between Iran and Iraq, and the USA was on the side of Iraq and Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s military dictator. However, it was more of a strategic alliance to protect the West’s Iraqi oil interests and not a de facto embrace of the cruel and despotic Hussein. As the saying goes, politics makes strange bedfellows. Also, in the 1980s we saw the hijacking of ships and planes by Islamic terrorists on a regular basis until finally President Ronald Reagan bombed the terrorist training camps in Libya and brought an end to that phase of Islamic terrorism.
Then, on September 11, 2001 we experienced the worst attack on America in our history with the hijacking of three domestic jet flights with one plane crashing itself into the Pentagon, two others purposely crashed into the World Trade Center in New York City, and a fourth plane was forced to crash in Pennsylvania killing all the passengers on the plane. Of the 19 hijackers, 16 were from Saudi Arabia.
Fast forward to March of this year. The Saudis and the Iranians decided to bury the hatchet and made a deal brokered by China. This deal may reduce tensions in Yemen between Shi’ites and Sunnis. The two factions put on a good face of burying the hatchet. Yet, we see that when it comes to hating the non-Islamic world, they have both been on the same page for a long time.
Thus, we see that there is the intractable unity of the Islamic world in its hatred of the non-Islamic world. This hatred has over time superseded the longstanding and deep differences between Islamic factions. Then there are the differences within the Islamic world where the factions try to get the most money and concessions from more powerful nations in the West, and recently from China to advance their respective power mad and greedy agendas. The West seems to treat this level -- which we can call “rational self-interest” -- as though it were the only level. However, the deeper level is the level of fanaticism. Live and let live is just not part of Islam. Love thy neighbor is an essential principal of Christianity upon which the West was founded; yet dark murderous themes eventually emerged and we had two world wars. Islam was more violent than Christianity from its beginnings and remains violent in its essence. Negotiations are inherently unworkable and superficial.
E. Jeffrey Ludwig was formerly a teaching fellow in American history and literature at Harvard University, and served on the Editorial Board of the Harvard Educational Review. He has also taught at Penn State, Boston State College, and Juniata College and was listed four times in Who’s Who Among America’s High School Teachers. He has been a regular contributor to American Thinker for 13 years.
Because of the takeover of Iran by the bloodthirsty ayatollahs in 1979, and their subsequent taking of American hostages, the USA became very much anti-Iran. Iran’s Muslim, ayatollah-governed country believed in the Shi’ite branch of Islam while the Saudis and most of the Muslim world are Sunnis. Their dispute -- from almost the founding of Islam to this day -- is about the basis for the line of succession to leadership in the Islamic world after the death of Muhammed. After 1979, we tended to support the Saudis and the Sunni faction in the Islamic world, which is much larger than the Shi’ite faction. Thus, until President Barack Obama decided to change our orientation and “make peace” with the Iranian Shi’ites, we faced some serious aggressions from Iran, and despite the Obama and Biden overtures, we still do.
No comments:
Post a Comment