Posts Tagged ‘Mohammad’

Government Education: Please Write ‘There Is No God But Allah’ And Wear This Hijab While You’re At It. Pardon Us While We Ban Your Christianity.

December 31, 2015

This is an amazing world under our demon-possessed president:.

I want you to carefully notice that this is NOT some accident where a “teacher” (read “Obama government propaganda expert”) hastily went online and googled “Arabic sentence” and inadvertently ended up with the WORST SENTENCE IN ISLAM.  No, the form specifically points out “Here is the shahada, the Islamic statement of faith, written in Arabic.”

Please write “There is no god but Allah.  Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.”  And we’re going to grade you on how well you do it.  Just don’t you DARE ask for a Bible.”

Public School Students Told to Practice Calligraphy by Writing ‘There is No God but Allah’
By PJ Media December 16, 2015

Students at Riverheads High School in Greenville, Virginia, were told to practice calligraphy by writing out the statement “There is no god but Allah. Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” The assignment was given by classroom teacher Cheri Laporte.

Riverbends-High-Header-600

That statement is known as the Muslim statement of faith or the shahada.  The school district defended the assignment last week when it met with outraged parents.

“Neither these lessons, nor any other lesson in the world geography course, are an attempt at indoctrination to Islam or any other religion, or a request for students to renounce their own faith or profess any belief,” the district said in a statement provided to Fox News.

Parents told The Schilling Show that their children were not given the translation of what they were writing.

Riverheads High School Principal, Max Lowe, did not directly acknowledge an inquiry requesting confirmation of the incident, clarification of policy, and disciplinary measures, if any, taken against Ms. Laporte.

The school district defended the assignment.

“The statement presented as an example of the calligraphy was not translated for students, nor were students asked to translate it, recite it or otherwise adopt or pronounce it as a personal belief,” the district stated.  “They were simply asked to attempt to artistically render written Arabic in order to understand its artistic complexity.”

Further, the district said the assignment was “consistent with the Virginia Department of Education Standards of Learning and the requirements for content instruction on world monotheistic religions.”

But parents say that other religions were not represented. Parents told The Schilling Show that “the Koran was presented to students, the Bible was not. The teacher reportedly declined to provide a Bible because all the students have either read or seen a Bible.”

Female students were also encouraged to wear a hijab, it was reported.

Now, while you kiddies are practicing your taking of the oath that there IS no god but Allah and Mohammad is his Prophet with your hijabs denoting your submission to Allah, please don’t mind us as Obama takes away ANY reference to Jesus Christ or the Holy Bible.

Meanwhile, the Obama commisars at another Obama government indoctrination center censored all biblical references from a “public school” CHARLIE BROWN/PEANUTS play.  I mean, shoot, you can’t have that: Allah doesn’t like it at all and neither does his modern prophet Obama.

Meanwhile, in yet another Obama government indoctrination center, a public high school football coach was suspended for praying.  For praying SILENTLY.  The Obama government indoctrination center – also known as a “public school” – banned prayer.  They not only banned prayer, but they officially sent “a letter banning private prayer.”  That’s right: PRIVATE PRAYER.  Because don’t you kid yourself, the Obama officials KNEW he wasn’t praying to a politically correct god.

It’s really for the kids’ own good.  Because if they keep their Christian faith, they will be flunked by liberal university professors.

I simply declare as a matter of factual historical record that my title is completely true.  No Bibles for anyone, girls put on your hijab, and join with me as we all recite the shahada which is the heart of religious Islam.  It’s an amazing thing.  And it’s going to take a while to explain why liberals are doing this.

Conservatives have been pointing out the rabid fascist fanaticism developing within our ivory towers for DECADES.  But the rot has “fundamentally transformed” beyond mere cancer and is now a viral culture-killing contagion.  I can show you Harvard’s newspaper openly calling to the banning and destruction of the 1st Amendment.  I can show you rank-and-file Yale students only too happy to end microagressions and preserve “safe spaces” by abolishing the 1st Amendment and the Constitution of the United States of America that was based on liberty and freedom.

Free speech has been abolished on liberal university campuses across the United States.  And I can document that just as easily in liberal newspapers such as the Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times as I can the Wall Street Journal:

UC’s new ‘Principles Against Intolerance’ fail free-speech test

University of California considering recognizing a “right” to be “free from … expressions of intolerance”

Intolerance of intolerance: Students are ever quicker to label offensive material as hate speech

Tolerance, Free Speech Collide on Campus: A philosophical divide is at the heart of recent protests that have roiled campuses around the country

Liberals are wicked-evil-depraved-immoral people and their way is ultimately the way of Stalinism.  Which is why they literally don’t mind the Islamists who harbor the same cherished goal: a totalitarian all-powerful State.  Which is why I can take you back to 2007 when “San Francisco State University put its chapter of the College Republicans on trial for desecrating the name of Allah.”

Which only serves to show you the left’s embrace of Islam is hardly anything new.

We have entered a time when history repeats itself, with the hell of ideas that resulted in the Marxists who swiftly became the Stalinists and the Nazis who swiftly created the Holocaust emerged from ivory tower academia.  Because ideas have CONSEQUENCES.  And just as in the past, we look to our now-rabidly fascist academia system and we see the most profound tolerance to competing ideas and free speech in general every bit as bad as the Islamic State fanatics.  Former Rhodes scholar and current professor emeritus of history at University of Toronto Scarborough Modris Ecksteins – who specializes in German history and modern culture – described Nazism thus: “Nazism was a popular variant of many of the impulses of the avant-garde.  It expressed on a more popular level many of the same tendencies and posited many of the same solutions that the avant-garde did on the level of ‘high art.'” [Rights of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age, p. 311]

Rights of Spring is an interest title because it points to what was THE birth of the movement known as “modernism” that the left embraced before they abandoned it in favor of the even MORE destructive philosophical view of Postmodernism that I previously described at length (How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 1); How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 2); How Postmodernism Leads To Fascism (part 3)).  In 1913, Igor Stravinsky created a ballet he titled “The Rites of Spring.”  Rather than the traditional (i.e. conservative) graceful, stylized music and dance of the ages, Stravinsky conducted an atonal, harsh music to which his dancers moved in a ritualistic but passionate way filled with spinning and thrashing.  The idea was to portray a primitive people who had nothing to do with the “shackles” of Judeo-Christianity, who as passionate environmentalists were at one with nature and celebrating the coming of spring.  The ballet culminated in human sacrifice.  You know, like every single abortion does.

The spirit of fascism arose out of a disenchantment culminating in a rabid rejection of the traditional, Judeo-Christian worldview.  It purported itself to be both refreshingly new and yet ancient at the same time, a return to a time before factories and oil companies and global warming, in other words.  The fascists, just like their Modernist counterparts, demonized the existing Judeo-Christian civilization and proposed revolutionary new structures and values in its place.  These people were not at all interested in the discovery of truth, but the creation of “truth” through the imposition of bureaucratic (e.g. the universities) and government power.

I want you to understand something before I move on: the spirit of Postmodernism – which is the philosophical underpinning of fascism – DOMINATES the Democrat Party.  I PREDICTED the violent Occupy Movement and the 7,775 arrests these violent liberal “demonstrators” have been handed in those articles on postmodernism that I wrote in 2008.  Consider the leftist Occupy Movement and what they did and how they actedVersus ZERO arrests for the Tea Party that was nevertheless thoroughly demonized by the leftist propaganda machine a.k.a. the mainstream media.  And now we’ve got the vicious Black Lives Matter “protests” that has resulted in police afraid to do their jobs protecting the public while “demonstrators” chant pure evil such as “Pigs in a blanket, fry ’em like bacon” and the chant from Obama’s pal Al Sharpton during his march: “What do we want? DEAD COPS! When do we want it? NOW!”

I want you to understand that back in 2008, I was pointing out that, just like the godless, Holocaust, ideas have consequences.  Liberalism and now the entire Democrat Party is pathologically secular humanist, atheistic, postmodernist, existentialist, deconstructionist, you name it.  And we are seeing the incredibly ugly consequences beginning to emerge.  Jonah Goldberg expressed this fact very powerfully in his great book, Modern Fascism:

For more than sixty years, liberals have insisted that the bacillus of fascism lies semi-dormant in the bloodstream of the political right.  And yet with the notable exception and complicated exceptions of Leo Strauss and Allan Bloom, no top-tier American conservative intellectual was a devotee if Nietzsche or a serious admirer of Heidegger.  All major conservative schools of thought trace themselves back to the champions of the Enlightenment – John Locke, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, Burke – and none of them have any direct intellectual link to Nazism or Nietzsche, to existentialism, nihilism, or even, for the most part, Pragmatism.  Meanwhile, the ranks of left-wing intellectuals are infested with ideas and thinkers squarely in the fascist tradition.  And yet all it takes is the abracadabra word “Marxist” to absolve most of them of any affinity with these currents.  The rest get off the hook merely by attacking bourgeois morality and American values – even though such attacks are themselves little better than a reprise of fascist arguments.

In a seminar there may be important distinctions to be made between, say, Foucault’s “enterprise of Unreason,” Derrida’s tyrannical logocentrism, and Hitler’s “revolt against reason.”  But such distinctions rarely translate beyond ivy-covered walls – and they are particularly meaningless to a movement that believes action is more important than ideas.  Deconstruction, existentialism, postmodernism, Pragmatism, relativism: all of these ideas had the same purpose – to erode the iron chains of tradition, dissolve the concrete foundations of truth, and firebomb the bunkers where the defenders of the ancien regime still fought and persevered.  These were ideologies of the “movement.”  The late Richard Rorty admitted as much conflating Nietzsche and Heidegger with James and Dewey as part of the same grand project. — Goldberg, Modern Fascism, pp. 175-176

I cited those paragraphs in another article I wrote armed with abundant evidence well over a year ago.  We are literally watching the rebirth of Nazism in the Democrat Party.  The only thing different now is that in the 1930s it was Aryan white people using racism against other people and now its the racist liberal race coalition that is using the same tactics against white people.

We talk about political correctness and many people – including those who claim to be opposed to it – have an incredibly cavalier attitude toward it.  It is incredibly dangerous and it is performing exactly as those who created intended.  Being politically correct is not just an attempt to make liberals feel better.  It is a very large, very sophisticated, very coordinated effort to change Western culture as we know it by  redefining it. Early Marxists designed their game plan long ago and the same leftists continue to execute that plan today: to control the argument by controlling the “acceptable” language.  If you use the wrong words or phraseology today, you won’t just get corrected or even screamed at; you’ll lose your job and be ruined.  Those with radical agendas understand the game plan and are taking advantage of an oversensitive, overly gullible, and frankly amoral public.

I’ve got news for you, liberal: Nazism was born out of YOUR vile mindset, not conservatism.  It was the same damn leftist artsy-fartsy elitist avant-garders in Germany doing the same damn things the same leftist artsy-fartsy elitist avant-garders are doing today in this country.

That’s why we see the same damn thing today that we saw as Nazism rose: Then as now, those who attacked democracy, ridiculed morality and celebrated violence did so in highly sophisticated ways that ultimately boiled down to “ends justify the means” arguments that are embraced by the same thug-socialists mobs who pushed Germany into Nazism.  You look at the Occupy Movement and its violent rights-abusive “occupations.”  You look now at Black Lives Matter.  And see how they openly violate other people’s free speech and other people’s rights on the SAME DAMN ARGUMENTS that we have seen before.  It was white Aryans doing it in Nazi Germany; it is black liberals doing it now.  Same abusive tactics, different screaming faces.  Just imagine the Nazis who couldn’t acknowledge that “all lives matter” because of course some of those lives were Jewish lives.  These people are DEHUMANISTS.  It’s the inevitable product that comes from the ideology responsible for the murder of sixty million innocent human beings in the abortion mills and then selling their body parts like meat at a deli.

Which again is why I can readily display the nexus between Islamic State and the American Democrat Party as BOTH are personally and morally vested in the trafficking of HUMAN BODY PARTS as the consequence of an innocent human being’s life being brutally ended by depraved people who will all one day scream in hell for what they did to human dignity.

IF you cite the Bible, you can ONLY do so as a pretense to bring in Muslims whom we CANNOT screen for terrorist connections from terrorist-ridden Syria.  Because at the core of liberalism is 1) gargantuan hypocrisy and 2) a vacuum of any legitimate transcendent values that they could actually refer to as grounds for their depraved views.

Any prayer in the name of Jesus makes the demons that inhabit Democrats’ crawl.  It is apparently an unpleasant feeling that Democrats cannot tolerate for long unless they stop that prayer.

What is funny is how liberalism is akin to a cockroach that devours her young.  Blacks, Hispanics, feminists, homosexuals, etc. think they are going to benefit from the rise of progressive liberalism (i.e., fascism), but they will ultimately be dismayed when the whip cracks down on them the way they are helping to crack the whip on Christians and conservatives and white men.  The negativism, iconoclasm, race-polarizing, divisiveness that characterizes todays special interest leftist groups to attack the established order, but just you wait until the left becomes the firmly entrenched order because suddenly any new complaint from you will be subversive to their order.  That’s exactly what happened to homosexuals as the Third Reich arose: Hitler rose to power on the homosexual-driven SA.  But when he no longer needed them and they became an obstacle to his greater rise, he ruthlessly crushed them.  And homosexuals perished in the very death camps they had helped to create.  It’s going to happen to you, too, rank-and-file liberal turd.  Because if you truly believe a Barack Obama or a Hillary Clinton give one damn about you, you are a true fool.  You are truly a means to their ends.

And when that day comes, you will have no Judeo-Christian transcendent values to appeal to – because YOU ARE THE ONES WHO DESTROYED THOSE VALUES.

But a far more awful fate ultimately awaits you:

When you’re screaming in hell for all of eternity, Democrat, just please realize that you truly deserve to be there.  YOU did all these things that unleashed hell on earth.  Your voting record caused all this wickedness to happen.  You are personally to blame and you WILL ultimately be held to account.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse of Revelation chapter six are coming.  Any wise person can hear their approaching hoofbeats as I write these words.  They’re not coming for me, liberal, because Jesus is going to return to take me to be with Him at the Rapture of believers.  No, the Four Horsemen and the Antichrist you will soon be cheering for and worshiping are coming for YOU.  Pretty soon you’re going to get EVERYTHING you voted for; because you voted for hell and hell is coming for you first in this world, and ultimately in the world to come.

 

Islam’s ONLY Hope For True Reform Comes From A Surprising Source. And What Of America’s Only Hope For Reform?

December 17, 2015

I’ve recently been contemplating the Qur’an and the pathological tendency toward violence within Islam.  And I’ve been contemplating how morally idiotic liberals irrationally and continually pronounce Islam as “a peaceful religion” when they would NEVER say the same thing about biblical Christianity given the Bible’s blatantly clear stances of abortion, homosexuality and socialism.

Is Islam a religion of peace?  Is Mars a planet with breathable atmosphere?  No and no, with both deserving a “No, stupid” delivered with suitable incredulous and condescending stare.

I’ve made the points recently: both the Bible and the Qur’an contain commands to violence and death.  Here’s an article from a decidedly liberal (i.e., hostile to Judeo-Christianity) perspective about the Bible being even MORE violent than the Qur’an in the eyes of progressive liberalism.  Penn State religious history professor Philip Jenkins launched his own “investigation” of the Bible vis a vis the Qur’an and concluded, “”Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible.”

And of course everyone is agonizingly aware of the ten top Christian terrorist organizations inflicting mass death in tens of thousands of terror attacks.  Oh, wait, they’re not, BECAUSE THERE AREN’T ANY CHRISTIAN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS the way we’ve suffered al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Islamic State, Taliban,  al-Shabaab, Hezbollah, Hamas, Ansar al-Sharia, al-Nusra, Muslim Brotherhood, etc., etc.

It’s just a complete mystery to liberals why a “religion of peace” like Islam is inspiring so much terror and hate and violence.  When they believe with ever fiber of their being that it ought to be the Christianity that they so despise that is the true source of all the violence.

Let’s consider this leftist professor’s claims and see if they are actually true.  I’ll begin with the Bible and proceed to expose a critical fact that Jenkins leaves entirely out of his false comparison.

Yes, the God of the Bible, in judgment of sin, commands the Israelites to wipe out and exterminate the inhabitants of the land He is giving His people.  God gives Abraham’s descendants through Isaac the Promised Land.  Shortly before Abraham dies, God tells Abraham this:

 “As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age.  Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete.” — Genesis 15:15-16.

Understand that God had already promised Abraham this land that belonged to another people in Genesis 12.  In the very passage I just quoted for you from Genesis 15, God immediately after verses 15-16 proceeds to specifically define the boundaries of the Promised Land that He just promised:

On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates–the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.” — Genesis 15:18-21

So God tells Abraham, “I am giving you THIS land, land that other peoples are currently on.  But not YET.  God’s promise unfolds throughout Genesis chapter 15. Look at the unfolding context:

  • 7He also said to him, “I am the LORD, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.”
  • 13Then the LORD said to him, “Know for certain that for four hundred years your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own and that they will be enslaved and mistreated there.
  • 14But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions.
  • 15You, however, will go to your ancestors in peace and be buried at a good old age.
  • 16In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”
  • 18On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates–
  • 19the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites,
  • 20Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites,
  • 21Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites.”

The Book of Genesis records Israel being invited into Egypt by a grateful Pharaoh but ultimately being cruelly enslaved by a subsequent Pharaoh.  And just as God had foretold to Abraham, Israel would spend 400 years in bondage as slaves.  But the Israelites were finally delivered through Moses.  And they came in and took the land that God had promised them.  And God gave them this land after having given the wicked people who inhabited it 400 years to get their moral acts together.

God tells the Israelites under the command of Moses’ successor Joshua to wipe out these peoples (i.e., the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites).  In Deuteronomy 20:16-18 God commands:

16“Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes. 17But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, 18 so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God.…

This theme – and the reason behind it – is repeated several times by God in the Old Testament, as Numbers 33:55 demonstrates:

‘But if you do not drive out the inhabitants of the land, those you allow to remain will become barbs in your eyes and thorns in your sides. They will give you trouble in the land where you will live.

So in these passages we have the commandment and we also have the REASON FOR the commandment: if Israel destroys its enemies and wipes them out, they will not be corrupted.  If they refuse or fail to wipe out their enemies, then the very same evil that brought God’s judgment on their enemies will enter into Israel and God will have to bring judgment upon THEM.

Which, for the record, is ultimately precisely what happened to Israel as is declared in numerous biblical passages.  We find in 1 Samuel 15:17-24 a simple statement that Israel refused to obey God’s commands.  They didn’t drive out these wicked peoples, who ultimately morally contaminated them and perverted the righteous culture God commanded them to create where previously only the wicked cultures of the Amorite, Jebusite, etc. had been.

Because Israel did NOT drive out the wicked peoples who inhabited the land God gave them according to God’s command, Israel became just as wicked if not MORE wicked than those people as their evil ways contaminated Israel’s culture:

But the people did not listen. Manasseh led them astray, so that they did more evil than the nations the LORD had destroyed before the Israelites. — 2 Kings 21:9

Habakkuk chapter one records the people becoming evil and the LORD raising up the Babylonians to judge them.

And so just as God used the Israelites as His weapon against the wicked peoples who inhabited the land that God gave to Israel, so God used the mighty Gentile nations such as the Egyptians, the Assyrians and the Babylonians against Israel.  God is sovereign over the nations, and He providentially uses them to ultimately accomplish His will.  And in His sovereign providence He uses the righteous and the wicked alike.

Israel was first subjugated by Gentile powers and ultimately after rejecting their Messiah ceased to exist for two millennia until God, in fulfillment of His word through Ezekiel, literally resurrected the nation back from the “dry bones” of the dead.  And in miraculous fulfillment of Isaiah 66:8 – “Who has ever heard of such things? Who has ever seen things like this? Can a country be born in a day or a nation be brought forth in a moment? Yet no sooner is Zion in labor than she gives birth to her children” – Israel was born in a day when the United Nations officially and historically declared her existence on May 14, 1948.  This was in direct response out of international outrage over the world having allowed six million Jews to be slaughtered in the Holocaust.

Liberals may not like it because they hate the God of the Bible, His righteousness, and His sovereignty over the nations when they yearn for a totalitarian socialist global new world order that exalts itself far above the God of the Bible.

God is sovereign over the nations.  Liberals despise Him for that; they want a world where the nation – the totalitarian human government – is sovereign over God.  They want a world where they dictate to God and to mankind what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is evil.  But I digress.

We have seen up to this point that in a violent world, God not only condoned but actually commanded His people Israel to employ the same violence that all the other people were employing.

BUT… we ultimately come to a critical turning point in the Bible: we come to the promise of a New Covenant.  The Old Testament itself affirms a coming New Covenant:

31 Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”Jeremiah 31:31-34

Hebrews 8:6-13 also affirms that this New Covenant has been fulfilled in Christ Jesus.

During the Last Supper Jesus said:

19And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 20And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.”  — Luke 22:19-21

Hebrews 9:15 states, “For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance–now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant.”

So we have a progression in both Testaments of the Bible from the Old Covenant to a New Covenant.  And the New Covenant is literally and even physically embodied in the Word, Messiah Jesus.

And what is it that Jesus taught?  What did He command?  Violence?  No, the Virgin-born fulfillment of Isaiah 9:6 came to be “the Prince of peace.”  And Jesus taught even as He was being led away to be viciously flogged and then crucified, “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.”

Liberals completely fail to comprehend this: the Bible begins with violence and moves to peace.

Not so the Qur’an.  Not so Muhammad.  When you read a Qur’an, understand that “Muhammad was like two different persons at two different times and the Quran is like two contradictory books pasted together.”  Understand that in Islam you have 1390 Years of Violence and only 10 years of Peace.

When Mohammad first began to proselytize his new religion in Mecca and claim that he was receiving revelations from Allah, he was decidedly the underdog.  And correspondingly all of his revelations centered around peaceful coexistence and tolerance.

But then Mohammad went to Medina in what is today called “Al Hijra.”  He was able to garner followers and became militarily powerful.  And suddenly all of the revelations of his Qur’an took a decidedly violent turn.

The Qur’an was NOT organized in any kind of chronological order; rather, it was organized by length, from the longest to the shortest suras.

When you re-arrange the Qur’an by chronology, you get this order: and you get not violence to peace as the Holy Bible gives, but peace to VIOLENCE.

So, for example, do your own research.  Consider the very first violent Sura 2:191-193 found in the Qur’an which states, And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killingbut if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful.   And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.  But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)”.  And lo and behold, when you examine the chronological order and look to the right column to see where it was organized according to the tradition based on length of sura, you find that this edict found in Sura 2 to “kill them wherever you may find them” is the VERY FIRST sura Mohammad conveniently claimed he received from Allah when he arrived in Medina and became the dominant power. 

This is not merely a command for violence; it is a UNIVERSAL COMMAND for violence.  I’ll talk about that more.

Keep going down the list of violent suras and look at where they are found, whether they were written earlier in Mohammad’s Mecca phase or later when he arrived at Medina and became militarily powerful.

You will find that without any question, the vast overwhelming majority of violent sura that commanded violence and death were given in Medina just as the vast overwhelming majority of suras commanding any kind of “peace” was given in Mecca.

A simple historic statement of fact: Mohammad and the Qur’an takes us from peace to viciousness and hate and murder and death and slaughter.

Now, this is bad, but it actually gets WORSE.  Because Islam has a doctrine called “abrogation” by which later suras correct and supercede earlier ones.

In other words, if Mohammad first said “peace” and then he said “war,” the ONLY correct interpretation of the Qur’an MUST BE WAR.

Now, abrogation is not necessarily such a terrible thing; every parent has done it: your child may ask you if she can go to a party, and then you find out something you don’t like about the party that makes you change or mind, or your child misbehaves and you say, “Now you can’t go.”  You’ve abrogated your previous statement.  You’ve said yes and now you’re saying no to the same thing you’d said yes to.  So if your child comes to you and says, “You said on Monday I could go, so I went,” you are enraged as you point out, “But I said on TUESDAY you could NOT go, so you are in a heap of trouble!”

It’s different when it comes to a revelation from God, though: God isn’t supposed to be caught by surprise or change His mind with new information or be wrong and then correct Himself.  How did Mohammad respond to this dilemma?  It seems that Qur’an 2:106 was “revealed” in response to skepticism directed at Muhammad that Allah’s revelations were not entirely consistent over time. Muhammad’s rebuttal was that ”Allah is able to do all things” — even change his mind.

And hence we have examples of blatantly obvious abrogation in the Qur’an such as:

In Surah 58, Al Mujadilah, verse 12, the believers are commanded to give alms before a private consultation with the Messenger. In verse 13 they are told that it is no longer necessary.

In Surah 33, Al Ahzab, verses 50-51 Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) is allowed to marry and divorce an unlimited number of women. In verse 52 he is prohibited to continue to do so.

In Surah 73, Al Muzzammil, verses 2-4, the prophet of Islam is commanded to spend about half of the night in prayer and reading of the Quran. In verse 20 of the same Surah this is changed into what is easy for him and those who followed his example.

But this Islamic view of Allah is in very direct contrast to the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible, and so we have passages like Numbers 23:19: “God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

Sneering liberal pseudo-intellectuals claim that Christianity has the same issue of abrogation, BUT WE DON’T.  And they are frankly moral idiots of the very lowest order to make such a blatantly false claim.  Here’s why:

  1. In every single example of violence in the Old Testament, it is ALWAYS in EVERY CASE a specific command by God to a specific people to do a specific thing at a specific time for a specific reason.  There is NO universalized commandment by God to always kill everyone the way we see in the Qur’an, no “kill them wherever you find them.”  There are no verses in the Bible that say “Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you…” (Qur’an 2:216), no “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah” (Qur’an 4:76).  God never gives a universal command that He later has to take back.
  2. If the Bible were given the same way the Qur’an is given, Moses would have commanded peace and Jesus would have come after Moses and subsequently taught, “But I tell you, hate your enemies and slaughter those who persecute you.”  When Jesus, in fulfillment of the New Covenant that even the Old Covenant itself anticipated hundreds of years before Jesus’ arrival on earth, as the Prince of Peace, actually taught, “But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).  You need to comprehend how absolutely MASSIVE is the difference between a religion that begins with violence and then moves to peace (Christianity) verses a religion that begins with peace and then ends with commands to universalized violence.
  3. The Bible pointedly “abrogates” ITSELF in terms of violence because it promises a New Covenant and then it DELIVERS one in the form of the Prince of Peace, Jesus.  The “abrogation” of violence was not for the sake of Jesus’ convenience, the way the abrogation of peace for a call to violence clearly was politically oh-so-very convenient for Mohammad.  Let me put it this way: Jesus told Peter, “Put away your sword” (Matthew 26:52) in order that He could be arrested and beaten and go to the cross where He would die a terrible, humiliating, agonizing death in our place for our sins.  Versus Mohammad who said let’s be peaceful when he was the underdog and then turned on a dime and ordered mass violence the moment his forces gained the upper hand.
  4. The Bible doesn’t “abrogate” violence merely because times had changed and the world was no longer a violent place and the Bible was correcting a problem that was obviously out of step with the rest of the world.  Any such notion is simply FALSE.  The Romans at the time of Christ were as vicious and brutal as ANYONE ever had been; what they did to Jesus itself proves that.  And Jesus’ disciples wrote the New Testament not only in light of what Rome had done to Jesus, but in light of the fact that even as they were writing, Rome was treating Christians viciously.  St. Peter and St. Paul were both executed by Rome, as were many other disciples.
  5. The God of the Bible is a God of wrath just as He is a God of love.  But all of His attributes are perfectly balanced, such that His wrath is manifested in the attribute of justice that ultimately flows from love.  And the toleration of evil results in a lack of justice.  And so God gave His people the sword and used them as an instrument in defined, limited circumstances and only in accordance with His command.  But ultimately He was always preparing for the arrival of His Son, the Prince of Peace.
  6. Finally, the thing that changed in the Bible was this: “But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship” (Galatians 4:4-5).  God prophesied a coming Messiah who would epitomize and usher in a “new covenant,” and Jesus came as foretold.
  7. And so Jesus completely fulfilled the Old Covenant (Matthew 5:17).  The various laws and regulations and customs of the Old Testament weren’t “abrogated,” but rather they were fulfilled and served their purpose and were no longer necessary because the promised Messiah took their burden off our necks.  And so Christians have realized even in the time of St. Peter that unless a principle or a command from the Old Covenant is specifically repeated/restated in the New Covenant, it was fulfilled by Christ and no longer applies to New Covenant believers.  We can compare the Old Covenant and the New to the abacus vs. the computer or the horse vs. the automobile: the former things weren’t “abrogated” and declared wrong; rather they served their purpose and we now use the superior things.  Christ is the Superior which fulfilled the inferior and the inferior that served as a type or a shadow (see for example Colossians 2:17Hebrews 8:5) of the Superior is therefore no longer needed.

It is for this reason that I point out the fact and hereby state for the historical record that Penn State religious history professor Philip Jenkins is an abject moral idiot and the worst kind of intellectual fraud.  He is, as are all progressive liberals, a pathologically ignorant fool masquerading himself as someone who is wise and knowledgeable when he in fact teaches the precise opposite of wisdom and knowledge.  Jenkins is not only utterly blind to what is actually going on all around him in the real world as Muslim terrorists murder and bomb innocent people in the name of Allah, but as I have just proven he is just as utterly blind to the religious theology that he claims that he is an expert in.

A passage from Colossians sums these liberal fools up well: “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ.” – Colossians 2:8.  Tragically, modern universities teach very little BUT “empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense.”

The fact that the Qur’an does NOT begin with violence and then end with peace, but rather the opposite, and the fact that abrogation forces true Muslims to accept that the later “revelations” to Mohammad supercede previous ones, puts Islam in a deep, dark pit of endless violence that is NOT true of Christianity.

Which is why Christianity and Christ are attacked all the damn TIME by liberals and Christians don’t unleash waves of violent hate the way Muslims routinely do the moment they even THINK their Prophet might be getting insulted.

We are left with a giant problem of Islam: we find that Islam, Mohammad and the Qur’an spent ten years deceiving people by preaching peace and tolerance in order to grow strong and powerful, and then the rest of history practicing force and violence and terror the moment they were able to gain the upper hand.

We find that Islam does NOT mean “peace” as liberals love to adoringly say; it means “submission.”  AND YOU WILL SUBMIT OR ELSE YOU WILL BE KILLED.

A historical study of Mohammad’s life reveals that the “Prophet of Peace” had fought in over thirty violent military campaigns and had at least another thirty campaigns planned at the time of his death in 632 AD.  In fact I can quote you Islamic sources that state, “that the Prophet waged jihad operations 77 times in the first 10 years as head of the Muslim community in Medina.”  But it is a fact of history that when Mohammad showed up at Medina, he became a violent terrorist warmonger who waged unrelenting war until he defeated and subjugated everyone around him.  What you will also find is that Islam did NOT practice peace after Mohammad’s death; in fact it split due to terrifying, graphic and vicious violence that continues to this very day as the viciousness created Sunni and Shiite Islam.  But within 100 years of Mohammad’s death, warring, violent Muslims were attacking Christian Europe and had killed an looted and pillaged their way all across the entirety of Europe before finally being crushed by Charles “the Hammer” Martel at the Battle of Tours in France in 732.  Violent warring Muslims had already poured across Africa and seized the Christian realms established by St. Augustine.  All of the vast peaceful Christian provinces of North Africa had fallen to the bloody sword of Allah by 711.  Violent, warring Muslims poured into Christian Spain to be finally defeated by El Cid.  Violent, warring Muslims poured into the Christian Byzantine Empire and besieged Constantinople and the Christian Emperor pleaded with the Pope to send Christian warriors to defend a Christian realm from Muslim conquest in what became known as the Crusades.

The United States of America, from its infancy, almost immediately came into contact with violent, warring Islam as the violent, warring Muslims from the Islamic Barbary States began a vicious campaign against the United States.  So we had ten years of “peace” and yes, fourteen centuries of violence and war.

The ONLY thing in history that has stopped Islam from violence against their “infidel” neighbors is raw military power and the Muslims’ naked fear of the “infidels'” willingness to use it.

The Muslims who are attacking us are doing nothing more than reading their Qur’ans in light of the life of their moral and spiritual paradigm, their Prophet, Mohammad.  Their lives are matching his teachings, and that is why they are “killing us wherever they may find us.”

Jesus, by contrast, never harmed anyone.  He was the Lamb of God who never harmed anyone or ever commanded anyone to ever harm anyone.  Jesus is the antithesis of Mohammad.

If you want peace, there is ultimately one one place and one Person to go to: to the foot of the Cross, to the feet of Jesus, who came to allow violence to prevail so He could ultimately prevail against all violence when He returns as King of kings and Lord of lords.

So, how then do you reform Islam?  If you have any honesty or intelligence, you ought to see the nearly insurmountable difficulty by now.

There is only one possible way and it is interesting where it is found:

It is found in the Qur’an itself.

What you have to do is go to one interesting and frankly incredibly embarrassing period for Muslims: when Mohammad received his “Satanic Verses.”

Here are a couple of links to understand what is going on from Answering Islam (another here) and from Muhammadanism.  But here’s what happened in a historic nutshell: while Mohammad was in Medina (his “peaceful” period), he was weak and had few followers.  He was estranged from even his own tribe.  And he had a “revelation” that it was okay for his followers to acknowledge and affirm the existence of three pagan goddesses alongside Allah: Lat, Uzza, and Manat.  When the inhabitants of Mecca heard Muhammad’s confession of the ancient goddesses inside the Ka’aba, they immediately revoked the ban they had placed on him and gave his movement political breathing room.  But the moment he was able to become strong enough to rescind his confession, he took it back by claiming that while he had believed it had come from Allah, it had actually come from Satan.  And so he went back on his confession because what he had put in the Qur’an as a revelation from Allah had actually come from Satan.  Hence the title, “the Satanic verses.”

I’m just going to say it: the ONLY hope for Islam in terms of any meaningful reform into a religion of actual peace is for Islam to affirm that the ENTIRE Medina portion of the Qur’an came from Satan.

It is a simple and undisputable fact of history that Mohammad HIMSELF took back part of his Qur’an and claimed it had actually been from Satan; ultimately, Muslims are going to have to take back a much bigger chunk of it and recognize that every violent sura came from the same Satan.

Mohammad himself acknowledged that Satan could enter into him and alter his revelation.  Run with it.

But what of the United States?  What is our only hope for reform?

Another fact of history to point out is that the United States actually has some powerful experience with dealing with fanatic death cults.  We faced one called “Imperial Japan.”  Believe it or not, Muslims were NOT the first people to fly planes loaded with bombs into human-inhabited structures: think “Kamikaze pilots” during World War II: not merely hundreds but THOUSANDS of them.  3,860 Japanese Kamikaze pilots died as their explosives-laden planes either crashed into American ships or were shot down trying to do so.

Oh, yes, America has dealt with “suicide bombers” and the ideology that sent them at us before.  Do you understand me?  WE’VE DEALT WITH THIS KIND OF VICIOUS MENTALITY BEFORE.  And we did not prevail over it by adopting any modern liberal pile of inane Obama blathering drivel.

How we defeated that existential threat to freedom and peace is a matter of history.

The Japanese Imperial fascists were every BIT as much of a national death cult as what we are confronting now with Islam: but the United States of America stopped being “a sleeping giant” and woke up enough to unleash a violent jihad of our OWN and we BROKE THE NECK of that national death cult.

I remember the quote from the Japanese admiral who had planned the Pearl Harbor attack and then realized what he had done as America began to rise up in righteous anger:

I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve.” Japanese Admiral Yamamoto

Islam is NOT going to reform by itself.  Any more than the Japanese were going to reform by themselves.  They’re going to need some confrontation.  They are going to need to be confronted with reason and with truth and with fact and with their own history and they are going to need to be confronted with a terrible resolve to use all the power we can bring against them until they are forced to see reason as the Japanese were forced to see reason.

But that means that the United States needs to reform as well if it is going to survive.  We desperately need to manifest the same “terrible resolve” that we were able to find in the days of our greatness.

Pain can be an awesome tutor when it is combined with truth.  That is the only chance to drive even a fool to finally see reason and do the right thing.

Liberals are people with a pathological hatred of truth.  And so what they keep repeating in their condescending moral idiocy is that everyone ought to be just like them and ignore truth, ignore reason, ignore history, ignore reality and just follow the blatherings of Obama.

The TRUTH is that Islam has an inherent, intrinsic, pathological problem with violence.  Ultimately, the ONLY way through to any genuine peace is to make Islam recognize that truth and DEAL with it.  Any liberal notion that the path to peace is to ignore the truth, bury our head in the sand and hope the truth somehow goes away is another word for “suicide.”

Liberals tell us over and over again that to confront Islam, to associate it with terrorism, will “radicalize” the Islamic world.  But here’s the thing: every single time liberals affirm this proposition, what they are in fact acknowledging is their own belief that every single Muslim is hair-trigger psycho and all it will take is the slightest provocation, the littlest nudge, to send them over the edge of madness and into bloodbath jihad.  They acknowledge that the very Christianity they revile so is a FAR superior worldview to every other worldview including Islam, because it is only in Christianity that we can have peace even with our enemies as we follow the teachings of Jesus as true disciples.  Let’s get beyond “Piss Christ” (a crucifix of Christ placed in a jar of urine) and Ofili’s “Holy Virgin Mary” (a mockery of the Virgin Mary smearing her with dung and pornographic images); just imagine the response if a Barack Obama tried to impose homosexual marriage on a Muslim country and imagine every single Muslim willing to crawl over the dead bodies of their own family members so they could get to Obama and cut his head off for his blasphemy.  Or how about this one: why don’t you Democrats try forcing the American people to fund “Piss Prophet” with tax dollars the same way you imposed “Piss Christ” on us and see how crazy insane Muslims get?

You don’t DARE do that.  Why not? 

And the answer is: because the mere act of drawing a cartoon – and let me assure you that a cartoon is FAR less offensive than your filthy, vile, disgusting urine, liberal – is enough to set off the entire Islamic world into a murderous rage.

And the answer is: because you KNOW Christianity is the only true source of peace on earth – as much as you hate it.  Just as you KNOW Islam is the source of violence just waiting to explode regardless of your dishonest rhetoric about “the religion of peace.”

Every single time a liberal so much as mentions the possibility of “radicalizing” the Muslim community, they affirm the spirit of violent hate just waiting to be unleashed by a religion that is manifestly violent.  Nobody worries about “radicalizing” Christians because you know full bloody well we don’t act that way.  You fear Muslims “radicalizing” if you so much as breathe wrong because no matter how much you want to suppress reality, bury the truth, deep, deep down you know how very wrong you are.

Go ahead, be a good liberal and follow the liberal way of burying your head in the sand so you won’t have to deal with REALITY:

The Bible spoke of wicked Israel before its judgment.  Let it speak to us before ours as well:

You boast, “We have struck a bargain to cheat death and have made a deal to dodge the grave. The coming destruction can never touch us, for we have built a strong refuge made of lies and deception.” — Isaiah 28:15

And we’ll see how long you keep your fool heads attached to your bodies the moment these people get to you:

003

If you bury your head in the sand to reality, you might as well lose your head, you deserve to lose your head – and we now live in an age where lose it you surely will.

We absolutely cannot continue to ignore the true reality – and yes, the terrifying reality – that is Islam.  We have to confront them with the truth and force them to acknowledge that truth and embrace the change they must embrace.  Or we will surely be fighting until the end of the planet in nuclear Armageddon.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Islam And The Crisis Posed By A Religion That Traces Itself To Mohammad

November 10, 2009

The Bible says of Ishmael, the ancestor of the Arab people:

“He shall be a wild ass of a man, his hand against every man and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell over against all his kinsmen” (Genesis 16:12).

We are constantly fed a fiction today concerning an issue that is growing larger and larger: Islam is a religion of peace, which a relative few crazed fanatics are trying to subvert.  The problem with this view is that it is a fiction.  The Muslims who support acts of religious violence against infidels (unbelievers) to their religion have a far stronger case to offer from the Koran and from the Hadith than do those Muslims who wish to have peace with the West.

The most terrifying problem of all is that the jihadists/terrorists are interpreting their Korans and their Islamic traditions more accurately than the Muslim contextualizers who are trying to make their religion compatible with Western values.  Why?  Because if the above is true, the problem becomes Islam itself, rather than a “few” (a few who nevertheless amount to tens of millions) “nutjobs.”

It is obvious why we would prefer the “few nutjobs” theory to be true, rather than the theory that Islam is a militant religion bent on conversion and expansion by force.  Who wouldn’t rather the former be true?  And yet it is also obvious why it is important to see the world as it really is, rather than merely as we wish it would be.

We are constantly told that Islam is a religion of peace.  It is not, and never has been; it is a religion of submission.  And problems arise whenever people in the Islamic sphere do not submit:  Women are oppressed.  Religious freedom is totally denied.  Anyone converting from Islam is killed.  We are also constantly told that Mohammad the Prophet of Islam was a man of peace; but history shows the exact opposite.

Mohammad was a man of violence who committed acts of genocide.  Most historians say that Mohammad led at least 27 military campaigns before his death in 632.  Many Muslims claim that the number was actually far higher – as many as 80.  And Mohammad had dozens more military campaigns planned at the time of his death.  Mohammad was a man of violence, a man who seized caravans and killed all the men, and enslaved all the women and children.  The Koran records his words to that effect: “I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. …And slay them wherever ye catch them….”

As you read the above words from Mohammad, realize that the Koran and Islamic tradition are quite clear that the Prophet is the supreme example of behavior for Muslims to follow.

Mohammad’s life can be divided into two phases: the Mecca phase and the Medina phase.  During the Mecca phase, Mohammad was greatly outnumbered and militarily weaker than his opponents.  We see his calls for peace during this phase.  But he left Mecca and subsequently grew strong in Medina – strong enough to ultimately seize Mecca by force.  During this phase, we find the increasingly violent calls to subdue the infidel by any means necessary.  This second and later phase has set the standard for Islam.

You do not find peace in Mohammad, or the religion which he founded.

You DO find it in the Person of Jesus of Nazareth and Christianity as being lived out as Jesus lived.  Unlike the paradigm of Mohammad, no one professing to be a Christian can credibly argue that Jesus, the Prince of Peace, taught violence, or anything that contradicted His precepts that those who live by the sword shall die by the sword (Matthew 26:52).

One hundred years after the death of Jesus, Christians were – and had been – dying as martyrs by the hundreds of thousands under some of the cruelest and most vicious persecutions the world has ever seen under the Roman emperors.  They sealed their testimony in their blood, proving their faith in Christ Jesus with their deaths, just as the Apostles had done with their deaths by martyrdom before them.

One hundred years after the death of Mohammad Muslim conquerors had long since set out with the scimitar.  They had poured across Arabia, poured across Africa, with violence in their hearts.  Christian communities in Africa and then Spain were eradicated.  And a vast Muslim army poured all the way across Europe killing and plundering, only to finally be stopped by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours near Poitiers in France.

Christians are frequently confronted with their crimes during the Crusades.  What is largely ignored are the four centuries of unrelenting Islamic violence that preceded the Crusades, or that the Crusades began when the Christian emperor of the Christian Byzantine Empire at Constantinople called upon the Pope for aid to protect the empire from the threat posed by an attacking Islam.

This is not to say that self-professing Christians didn’t commit many evils during the Crusades, or during other times.  I merely point out that Islam had a long-standing tradition of continual violence that Christendom ultimately had to respond to.  Just as Western civilization needs to respond to the violence posed by Islam today.  Christians today – partly because of the Crusades – realize that there is no “Kingdom of Heaven” on earth; and the Christian’s ultimate kingdom is with Christ in heaven, rather than some geographical location at Jerusalem or any other place on earth.  We were wrong for believing we needed to go to war to claim Jerusalem for Christendom.

Allow me to contrast the Christian view of territory with the Islamic one:

According to the Muslim way of thinking, the world is divided into two areas: Dar al-Islam is the area already conquered by Islam. Dar al-Harb is the area of war, which the Arabs are commanded to conquer until it is turned into Muslim territory. After a certain territory has been conquered by Islam, it is declared as holy Muslim territory, which is forbidden to be relinquished under any circumstances.

[See here for more].

We need to face up to many theological and historical issues within Islam itself in order to come to some understanding as to how to begin to solve the obviously growing problem of violence.

Robert Spencer put it this way:

“If Mohammad taught violence, if Mohammad taught a doctrine of required holy war against infidels, if Mohammad conflated religion and government it will change mujahedin around the world not one bit to pretend otherwise; they will continue to invoke what they believe to be his authentic teachings in order to justify their actions.  The fact that truths are difficult is no reason to choose unreality and ‘polite fictions.'”

I would agree with any Muslim who says that terrorism is not an essential part of Islam.  Of course it isn’t.  As human beings, we are not automatons, we are free-willed human beings who make our own choices – and who are held responsible for the choices we make.

But I would also confront any Muslim who wants to see true peace with the rest of the world to account for the fact that virtually all of the hundreds of thousands of violent terrorist acts in the world resulted from Islamic theology, by men who screamed “Allahu Akbar!” as they murdered.

And I would confront Muslims to quit blaming the existence of Israel for violence and finally look at themselves instead.  Many Muslims demand that the Jews surrender the land that they “stole” from Palestinians.  I disagree that the Jews did any such thing, but let me agree with the premise for the sake of argument.  Fine.  Let every Muslim first surrender every square inch of land that Islam has seized, just to show that they are not hypocrites who demand standards from others that they would never be willing to put upon themselves.

And I would similarly point out that Jews have not been the source of violence and death in the Muslim world.  The fact is rather that:

some 11,000,000 Muslims have been violently killed since 1948, of which 35,000, or 0.3 percent, died during the sixty years of fighting Israel, or just 1 out of every 315 Muslim fatalities. In contrast, over 90 percent of the 11 million who perished were killed by fellow Muslims.”

Today, tens of millions of Muslims live in fear of criticizing their fellow Muslims who are willing to employ violent jihad for fear that they will become the next victims of such Muslim violence.

And herein lies the rub.  If only a few “nutjobs” are “highjacking” (actually a very good word indeed given that we are talking about terrorism) a good and noble and peaceful religion, then let the hundreds of millions of Muslims who do not support the use of terrorism rise up as one man and deal with the clearly-growing crisis of violence that has been growing for decades inside their very own house.  Rather than standing by on the sidelines in fear and apathy, if you moderate Muslims REALLY speak for “true Islam,” then please finally stand up and DO so.  Put your money where your mouth is, so to speak.

Don’t allow armed murderers to hide themselves among you, only to kill and murder before concealing themselves once more among you, and then claim that you aren’t responsible.  You moderate Muslims ARE responsible for what is happening all around you.

Islam is and will continue to be a religion of terrorist violence unless you moderate Muslims stand up and make it something different.

It’s time to take a side between “Islam, the religion of violence,” and “Islam, the religion of peace.”

Christians, Jews, and Muslims actually can stand in agreement on a great many things.  While we clearly disagree on the nature of God and His revelation, we nevertheless are people who believe in God and believe in divine revelation.  And therefore we agree that there are objective transcendent moral values.  There are a great many things we could agree upon, if we put our minds and our hearts to it.

Selected passages from the Koran detailing the fundamental intolerance and violence endemic to Islam:

Quran 9:5 “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”
9:112 “The Believers fight in Allah’s cause; they slay and are slain, kill and are killed.”
8:39 “So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world).”
8:65 “O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding.”
61:2 “O Muslims, why say one thing and do another? Grievously odious and hateful is it in the sight of Allah that you say that which you do not. Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in a battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure.”
9:38 “Believers, what is the matter with you, that when you are asked to go forth and fight in Allah’s Cause you cling to the earth? Do you prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? Unless you go forth, He will afflict and punish you with a painful doom, and put others in your place.”
47:4 “When you clash with the unbelieving Infidels in battle (fighting Jihad in Allah’s Cause), smite their necks until you overpower them, killing and wounding many of them. At length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly, making (them) captives. Thereafter either generosity or ransom (them based upon what benefits Islam) until the war lays down its burdens. Thus are you commanded by Allah to continue carrying out Jihad against the unbelieving infidels until they submit to Islam.”

.

Musharraf Resigns, Leaving Comprimise As Pakistan’s Official Policy On Terrorism

August 18, 2008

The most strategically critical American ally in the war on global terrorism is gone, having announced his resignation today.

Coming on the heels of the Russian invasion of Georgia – and the resulting reawakening of tensions between former superpower rivals, this news further escalates the awareness of the stark realities of the 21st century. And it will all-too shortly be followed by Iran – protected by Russia from international sanctions – developing a nuclear arsenal.

It might be a good development for Pakistan, but I believe time will prove that it is a bad one for the United States and for those who would fight to defeat the rising threat of Islamic terror.

The Associated Press story by Zarar Khan at least presents some of the key issues:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf announced Monday that he will resign, just days ahead of impeachment in parliament over attempts by the U.S.-backed leader to impose authoritarian rule on his turbulent nation.

An emotional Musharraf said he wanted to spare the nation from a perilous impeachment battle and that he was satisfied that all he had done “was for the people and for the country.”

“I hope the nation and the people will forgive my mistakes,” Musharraf said in a televised address, much of which was devoted to defending his record and refuting criticisms.

Musharraf dominated Pakistan for years after seizing power in a 1999 military coup, making the country a key strategic ally of the U.S. by supporting the war on terror. But his popularity at home sank over the years.

While political exit robs the West of a stalwart ally, Musharraf’s influence has faded since he stepped down as army chief last year. Washington and European capitals will hope his removal will let the civilian government focus on terrorism and the country’s economic woes.

Many Pakistanis blame the rising militant violence in their country on Musharraf’s alliance with the U.S. His reputation suffered blows in 2007 when he ousted dozens of judges and imposed emergency rule. His rivals won February parliamentary elections and have since sought his ouster, announcing impeachment plans earlier this month.

As Dinah Lord put it:

Protesters took to the streets of Lahore to denounce President Pervez Musharraf over the wave of jihadi suicide attacks, labelling him a “dog” and a “pimp” for his policies against the militants that have provoked the violence.

And now the Pakistani government is free to continue its new policy of compromise and appeasement with terrorism unabated.

Some articles essentially present a sterilized, optimistic account of how this new policy of “negotiation” will alleviate the terror threat.

But Hot Air is already showing just how full of, well, hot air such views really are. Citing a new sharia-based edict from the Taliban that all men grow their beards or face “harsh punishment,” Ed Morrissey goes on to write:

Not surprisingly, the Taliban and its leaders feel freer to issue — and enforce — such strictures in the area that Pakistan has all but conceded to them. Nor has it bought any peace for the residents of Waziristan and NWFP. AFP reports that “activities” against hair salons and music stores have increased since the military has stopped its operations against the Taliban.

Sovereignty requires a government to exercise its authority over that of militias and renegades. The abdication of those responsibilities in Waziristan and NWFP calls into question whether these territories can actual be considered Pakistani. That was one of the underlying principles of the Bush Doctrine after 9/11, and why Pervez Musharraf always understood that he had to at least give some effort in fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda in these regions. Otherwise, the US could consider Pakistan as having withdrawn from the area and our hot-pursuit needs would then take precedence.

The new Pakistani government has obviously not learned much of the lessons of appeasement since the 1930s. If they continue to refuse to recognize the danger of their policy and allow these lunatics loose in the frontier regions, the US has to make clear that we do not consider ourselves bound by that decision.

And that is precisely true. If these terrorists are not killed or defeated, and if they do not disband or renounce their extremists views, then how can anyone believe that they will somehow go away?

They will continue to remain in their strongholds, continue to fester like the cancers on humanity they are, and will continue to grow in strength until the weak, corrupt national governments are no longer able to contain them. As Morrissey points out, most of these “negotiations” are already completely empty.

The increasing unrest in Afghanistan is not the failure of American troops; it is the failure of Pakistan to effectively deal with the Taliban forces infesting the border regions.  Musharraf had to negotiate with them when he was weakened by domestic political turmoil; and now a “Democratic” government that is split between rival factions will be in an even more weakened position.  The Taliban will undoubtedly take this opportunity to spread their ideology both within Pakistan and into Afghanistan.

Perez Musharraf was a tough leader, even a dictator. But it takes a violent man to deal with violent people, and too often we are seeing that Islam represents the deification of violence.

Giving bad people the right to vote doesn’t lead to good consequences simply because they are part of a “democracy” now. They are merely free to exercise their power to choose and support evil policies. We’ve already seen that in the Palestinian territories, which used their “democracy” to elect hard-core terrorist organization Hamas.

John Quincy Adams knew what he was talking about when he said, “Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Another statement, generally attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville, builds on this foundation: “America is great because she is good, and If America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”

The founder of Christianity was Jesus of Nazareth. He told his followers to put away their swords. The founder of Islam is Mohammad. He taught his followers to take up their scimitars. The literal-historical exegesis of the Bible leads to peace; the literal-historical exegesis of the Qu’ran leads to submission by any means necessary. Mohammad was involved in dozens of military campaigns, during which he ordered acts of great violence. He had over twenty more such campaigns planned at the time of hid death.

Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi builds a case based on study of history, the Qu’ran, and the Ahadith to demonstrate that Mohammad progressed through four stages on violence, beginning with when his followers were few and weak and progressing as they became more numerous and more strong.

Stage One: No Retaliation
Stage Two: Defensive Fighting is Permitted
Stage Three: Defensive fighting is Commanded
Stage Four: Offensive War is Commanded Against the Pagans, Christians and Jews.

The Muslims of today are clearly increasingly progressing toward their “highest” stage.

The terrifying truth is that as Muslims are becoming more “Muslim,” they are becoming more violent.

How does compromise with people who are determined to kill you and destroy your freedoms and your very way of life work?

I end with this: Dinah Lord’s blog had a counter. Islamic terrorists have carried out more than 11671 deadly terror attacks since 9/11.

The American way of life has often been stated as “Live free or die!” Islamic terrorists are only too happy to grant us the second condition if we attempt to pursue the first.