A lie conceals the truth. And ugly but hidden truths never have a chance of being acknowledged, addressed, and ultimately ameliorated.
Because of this simple truism, one of the greatest lies of our age—that violence committed in the name of Islam has nothing to do with Islam—has made an intrinsically weak Islam the scourge of the modern world, with no signs of relief on the horizon.
One of the latest manifestations of this lie took place in Pakistan. On Easter Sunday, March 27, a suicide bombing took place near the children rides of a public park, where Christians were congregated and celebrating the resurrection of their Lord. At least 74 people—mostly Christian women and children—were killed and nearly 400 injured. “There was human flesh on the walls of our house,” recalled a witness.
Who—or what—was responsible for this assault? “We claim responsibility for the attack on Christians as they were celebrating Easter,” said Jamaatul Ahraar, a splinter group of the Taliban. In a media statement, the group said it had “deliberately targeted the Christian community,” adding that “we had been waiting for this occasion.”
The Taliban and its affiliates are not alone. Click here, here, here, here, and here, for numerous examples of similarly lethal attacks on Christians celebrating Christmas or Easter by other Islamic groups and individuals around the world who also “had been waiting for this occasion.” Even “the terror cell that struck in Brussels [last month, killing 34] was planning to massacre worshippers at Easter church services across Europe, including Britain, intelligence chiefs believe.”
Still, connecting the dots and understanding what binds all Islamic terrorist groups is a big no-no for the so-called mainstream media. The problem, we will be told, is the “Taliban,” which “has nothing to do with Islam.” Rather, it’s a finite, temporal, localized problem: defeat it, and the problem vanishes.
Meanwhile, about 5,000 miles west of Taliban territory, in Nigeria, Christians are also under attack. Indeed, according to a new report, since 2000, some 12,000 Christians have been slaughtered for their faith and 13,000 churches destroyed. Just last month, over 500 Christians were butchered.
According to the official narrative, something called “Boko Haram” is responsible. This is another group that defines itself exclusively according to Islam; another group that habitually bombs churches during Christmas and Easter; and another group that, we are told, “has nothing to do with Islam,” but rather is a finite, temporal, localized problem: defeat it, and the problem vanishes.
About 5,000 miles west of Nigeria, in the U.S., Americans were told that something called “al-Qaeda” attacked and killed 3,000 of their countrymen on 9/11; defeating that finite group would cease the terror. Its leader, Osama bin Laden, was killed, and victory loudly proclaimed—except that an even more savage manifestation, this time called the “Islamic State” (it too “has nothing to do with Islam”) came on the scene and has gone further than al-Qaeda could’ve ever dreamed, in great part thanks to the Obama administration.
It gets worse. The problem is not only that the media and decision-makers refuse to connect the dots and insist on treating each of the aforementioned groups as disparate, finite groups with different motivations—none of which has to do with Islam. The problem is that regular Muslims who are not called “Taliban,” “Boko Haram,” “al-Qaeda,” “ISIS,” ad infinitum commit similar acts, and much more frequently, though this is rarely ever mentioned by the MSM.
Thus, although the “Taliban” was behind the recent Easter Day massacre, it is everyday Muslims who discriminate against, persecute, enslave, rape and sometimes murder Christians every day in Pakistan (click here for a typical month); it was everyday Muslims who burned a young Christian couple alive due to unsubstantiated rumors that they had insulted Muhammad.
Those who slaughtered 500 Christians last month in Nigeria were not “Boko Haram” but rather un-affiliated (but Muslim) herdsmen. Likewise, “Northern Muslim political and religious elite are also major actors of targeted violence towards the Christian minority.”
Although ISIS claimed the Brussels attack, it is everyday Muslims who ban, burn, bomb, and urinate on Christian churches, and who, as in Pakistan and other Muslim majority nations, target non-Muslim European women for rape on the basis that they are subhuman “infidels.”
This is the real issue. While the media may name the terrorist groups responsible for especially spectacular attacks—followed by the customary admonitions that they “have nothing to do with Islam”—few dare acknowledge that Muslims in general engage in similar acts of violence and intolerance against non-Muslims. According to a recent study, Muslims —of all races, nationalities, languages, and socio-political and economic circumstances, hardly just “terror groups”—are responsible for persecuting Christians in 41 of the 50 worst nations to be Christian in.
These statistics are consistent with a recent Pew poll finding that, in 11 countries alone, at least 63 million and as many as 287 million Muslims support ISIS. Similarly, 81% of respondents to a recent Al Jazeera poll supported the Islamic State.
In sum, what “extremist” “terrorist” and “militant” groups (that “have nothing to do with Islam”) are doing is but the tip of the iceberg of what Muslims are doing all around the world. (See “Muslim Persecution of Christians,” reports which I’ve been compiling every month since July 2011 and witness the nonstop discrimination, persecution, and carnage committed by “everyday” Muslims against Christians. Each monthly report contains dozens of atrocities, any of which if committed by Christians against Muslims would receive 24/7 blanket coverage.)
Media aren’t just covering up for Islam by pretending that the spectacular attacks committed by Islamic groups on non-Muslims “have nothing to do with Islam.” They are covering up for Islam by failing to report the everyday persecution non-Muslims experience at the hands of everyday Muslims—Muslim individuals, Muslim mobs, Muslim police, and Muslim governments (including America’s closest “friends and allies”)—not just Muslim “terrorists.”
Because of these entrenched lies, the world must continue to suffer from Islamic terror. Not only have these lies allowed countless innocents to be persecuted into oblivion in the Muslim world, but they have allowed the same persecution to enter America and Europe, most recently via mass immigration.
The fact remains: an ugly truth must first be acknowledged before it can be remedied. It may be hard to acknowledge an ugly truth—that Islam, not “radical Islam,” promotes hate for and violence against non-Muslims—but anything less will just continue to feed the lie, that is, continue to feed the jihad and terror.
The Council on American Islamic Relations is whining over who is on the terrorist watch list. When I took the contra view to the sympathetic commenters on DISQUS I was promptly deleted. So much for free speech.
There is NO free speech in the west. Just the illusion of such as deemed sufficient by the Left. I have been ejected from numerous sites for simply quoting the rubbish attributed to the warlord. But DO remember: we would not have 99% of the problem with islam but for the Left. The LEFT are the enemy and islam is their weapon although like all Marxist/Leninist foolds have NO idea of what they have unleashed. The problem now is that they fanatically defend their position even as more and more defectors now admit the truth but still NOTHING is done that will work long term: close madrassas, destroy mosques that advocate any violence or suprematism, deport all muslims that advocate sharia or suprematism, execute all terrorists. Islam fights via total war and only total war will defeat it.
Wrong, we do have free speech in the USA and we have got to be brave enough to use it and say that Muslim terrorists are inspired by Islam and that Islam is a religion of jihad and misogyny. Of course, the left wing dhimmis will call us racists and Islamophobes, but we can still speak our minds. If Shillary is elected to two terms, we may lose our freedom of speech to hate speech laws which liberals promote. Never vote for a Democrat again.
Why “Islamophobia” and not Buddhismophobia, Sikhophobia, Bahaiophobia, Yezidiophobia or Mormonophobia?
Why is the historical evidence of the NON-EXISTENCE of a “prophet” called Muhammad so difficult to get by? For all those who understand French: http://ripostelaique.com/author/rene-fries [the 8 articles appear in reverse order, the first one being chronologically the last].
For all those who don’t, here are some elements translated:
A series of books called “Inârah” and published by the scientific Verlag Hans Schiler, Berlin: I own them from “Die dunklen Anfänge // The dark beginnings” to “Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion I // The inception of a world religion I”, in total 5 volumes, average price € 70. It’s not useless here to suggest to all those who have science infused or, worse still, “believe” [“the inconditionality of the Faith and the dubious character of Thinking (are) two ABYSSALLY different sectors” (in “Was heiβt Denken?” by Martin Heidegger, Max Niemeyer Verlag Tübingen 1984, p. 110)], it’s not useless, then, to suggest that all these people learn German because apparently, no translation is available yet. And anyhow, to brace themselves for a truth – not a “truth of faith” but a historical one – which, unpleasant as it may be for some, has the advantage of being, precisely, a historical truth. However, the daunting and off-putting character as well as the complexity of all that stuff, coming on top of the huge cost, has lead to the obvious –- and sad –- fact that all this scientifically indisputable knowledge still is not as widely known as it should be: indeed, some ten thousands of books amongst more than 100 millions of German-speaking people, this amounts to a near-zero percentage. Of course, this complete ignorance amongst the general public is the key phenomenon on which the islamists and their supporters rely, so as to be able to continue furthering their agenda successfully.
Quote: ” … the vast majority of the hadiths were pure falsifications dating from the end of the second muslim century as well as from the third. This of course meant ‘that the super-detailed isnads on which they rest, are gross forgeries and nothing else’.” [“Die dunklen Anfänge”, p. 215].
Quote: “Here you can see that in the immediate vicinity of Mecca in the year 58/677-8, the prophet of nowadays’ islam still was unknown” [“Vom Koran zum Islam”, p. 143]. And on p. 335, in a chapter titled “The dissolution of the binding of the christologic predicate away from Jesus” one can read that “this process of a displacement of the centre of interest onto the honorific designations and their progressive break-away from their historic catalysator Jesus, who was the primary subject of all these predications, can be verified and proven historically”.
Furthermore, the “two folios (with text corresponding to chapters 18-20 in the modern Qur’an)” mentioned in THE CONVERSATION — Academic rigour, journalistic flair (http://theconversation.com/dis… only are proof of the fact – and of nothing else – that the old-testament story of Moses is narrated in the “lectionnaire” generally in use at that time in the Middle East [this “lectionnaire” begging for the remark that “this constatation is the real and specific discovery demonstrating that there pre-existed a document written in Syriac (the so-called Garshouni/Karshouni) from which the ‘Ur-Koran’ was recopied” [“Der frühe Islam”, pp. 380 sq]. Here it must also be emphasized that “Anthony Glees has stated that 8 British universities amongst which Oxford and Cambridge, have received a total of GBP 233,5 millions from Saudi Arabia (…) An article by The Guardian has quoted Dr. Denis MacEoin, expert for islam at Newcastle University. According to Dr. MacEoin, academicians become nervous when they would have to treat any subject that could upset the sponsors. (…) He warned: ‘This menaces our academic freedom and critical thought’.” – Big surprise for everyone (?), Dr. MacEoin thus “was dismissed from his functions at the university because his ideas didn’t please the Saudis who finance the islamic department” [“Die Entstehung einer Weltreligion I”, pp. 420 sq]. “8 British universities amongst which Oxford and Cambridge”: such manifestly manipulated sources are eminently suspect and anyhow, of no use at all in a scientific perspective.
A muslimic cleric named Wael Al-Zarad has given a speech on feb 28, 2008 on Al-Aqsa-TV, according to which the sanguinary revenge of the muslims against the Jews “will only subside with their complete annihilation, Allah willing, because they have tried repeatedly to kill our prophet”. It’s plain for all to see that it is strictly impossible to kill someone who doesn’t exist – and moreover, it’s strictly impossible also to “insult” him, be it with Danish or even French caricatures.
In other words, in a normal world it would be normal that mollahs and imams at last would addition two plus two. But given their remunerations and other privileges, this, of course, will never happen. On the other side, it is difficult to see why a society, which is entirely based on scientific knowledge (and which would sign its own death sentence by accepting to put any obstacle in the way of that science), would have to accept a ferocious and protracted denial of that same science for as far as, like in the time of Galilei, it puts on display the utter and proven falsity of some beliefs.
“In no other culture, not to speak of religion, one can find the codification of murder, looting, enslaving and extortion of tribute as being religious duties. In no other religion one can find the sacred legitimization of violence as being God’s will against non-islamic people, such as codified by islam in the qur’ân as integral part of the ideology, and confirmed by the historical praxis. Last but not least, there cannot be found any other religious founder whose role-model to be followed, such as in the case of Muhammad, not only pertains to the conduct of wars but also entails the elimination of adversaries by murder on command” [Hans Peter Raddatz, in: “Von Allah zum Terror?”, Herbig, Munich 2002, p. 71]. It is true that in 2002, when this book came out, the aforementioned “Inârah”-series still was in the making. It is as true as well that since then, there have been very great changes.
To such an extent that we now are in a position, IF WE WISH, to cause once and for all the definitive disappearance of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram e tutti quanti.
Indeed, as specified in the German Quarterly “DIE BRÜCKE – Forum für antirassistische Politik und Kultur” nr. 164 p. 87, it would be quite sufficient to compulsorily teach the aforementioned historical truth in all of the 28 EU member states. This obligation, needless to say, stems from the equality principle enshrined in all our constitutions. As a matter of fact, indeed: How could it possibly be justified that on the one hand, the historical truth of the “Bibelkritik” (Wellhausen, Bultmann, Rosenzweig, Söding etc: “Jesus really existed, but we only can accept the historical truth of the Our Father”) be teached everywhere but that on the other hand, the historical truth of the “Korankritik” is systematically put on the sidelines if not outright ignored and, what is more, “dangerous to tell”.
This historical truth, in short, is that “(…) these verses which were revelated to Muhammad in Mecca, at a time when his followers were but a few and feeble and thus more enclined to making compromises” (David Bukay, Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2007, p. 3-11) in fact represent the “Ur-Koran”, i.e. a “lectionnaire” based mainly but not entirely on Tatian’s “Diatesseron”, and that “the later verses, revealed in Medina when Muhammad’s power had become far greater” are nothing else than political justifications churned out in Baghdad under the caliphs al-Mamûn and al-Mu’tasim-billâh, which “justify” (not only but also) jihad and (not only but also) the more than 28.000 islamofascist terrorist attacks since Nine Eleven. These so-called “Medinese” surates i.e. the “hard” verses (for instance 2:190-191, 3:151, 4:89, 9:2, 9:5, 47:4 etc) supersede in case of conflict, as is well-known, the “Meccan” verses (more “gentle”, for instance 16:126-127, 29:47, 5:49 etc) by the virtue of what is known as “abrogation” (verses 2:106, 3:185, 16:101). This makes that al-Baghdadi, who seems to know his qur’ân very well, is entirely right, from his point of view, when he laughs at the contorsions being made by Merkel, Obama, Hollande and Cameron each and every time violent jihad is spoken of.
To sum up: What is currently called “islam” [correct translation according to Luxenberg = “conformity (with the Holy Scriptures)”] is not at all a religion but indeed, a supremacistic ideology which, in its texts, its goals and its techniques, bears a striking resemblance to that other supremacist and anti-democratic ideology, namely Nazism: so for instance, muslims are “the best of people” (3:110 – …the nazis having had for such “best of”, as is well-known, the designation “Herrenmenschen”), whilst the “kuffars”, that’s all of us non-muslims, are named “apes” (2:65), “swine” (5:60) and “dogs” (7:176), what obviously equates the nazi term “Untermenschen”.
Hence, it is not only impossible to insult Muhammad because he never existed, but also to insult “a religion, islam” because it is not a religion [by the way, the European Court of Human Rights repeatedly stated that “sharia is incompatible with democracy”]. And for what concerns possible “insults”, it is obvious that the only ones to be insulted in all this, that’s nobody else than us, the kuffars, the apes, the swine and the dogs (the “Untermenschen”). The fact that these insults, absolutely anti-democratic and anti-constitutional needless to say, are consecrated by and codified in a “holy” book, is totally irrelevant in the face of our ad-hoc legislation which one would like to see enforced, at last.
It is a good scientific basis to dismantle Islam, but nothing will happen unless there is a will in the West to defend its millenarian culture. In this instance, knowledge is excellent but guns will do better.
You Americans have the 2nd amendment. Here in Belgium, where I’m living, I just have the right to be shot dead in my own house before I may react. This is because only gangsters and jihadists are allowed to bear arms — …of course, they’re not LEGALLY allowed, but since they “respect” only their own whims, this is what all that amounts to.
On the other side, perhaps “guns” are not that necessary since I guess that in the US also, “compulsorily teach the aforementioned historical truth” would be an “obligation (which), needless to say, stems from the equality principle enshrined in YOUR constitution” for as far as I know.
The government is slowly taking our second amendment rights away from us. If we get another liberal judge on the Supreme Court will probably lose all our rights to hold and bear arms.
“The Constitution is supreme, not the judicial decisions misinterpreting it.” http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/05/15013/
Well put! Send to all the politicians,and anyone with any influence with the backbone to do something with this excellent document. We truly live in an age of fear and insanity. I cannot imagine any other religion ever getting away with it. Indeed we constantly debate Christianity, and it’s relevance in today’s society. The cause of the cowardice I imagine in standing up to the people who spout religious bile who indeed think we are worthless belly crawlers is that they shout and scream the usual racist and , islamaphobic rant and , for good measure the person brave enough to say we will have no more of this nonsense has a death sentence placed on their heads. If our leaders stood firm they could crush this madness in our country. However, daily life erodes, and becomes occupied by NATZI insanity. It can be nothing else! How does one explain a group of people who see the rest of society inferior, and rule by the jackboot. Anyone to stand up to them receives a death sentence. We are now an occupied country, and it is a matter of time before we no longer enjoy our freedom. We conduct debates behind closed doors, and we mutter under our breath. All can see the decay, and no longer have any respect for our leaders who allow their people to become slaves in the country our forefathers created, and died for. Europe suffered through the ages from religious madness, and we broke free, and created something good. However, we indeed now all live in a very dark age. A return to the religious jackboot that spews bile and insecurity in the name of hate and violence.
I wrote “IF WE WISH”.
Now, I really am a computer-idiot, but my little knowledge of modern communication is that it should be possible to rapidly spread (via Twitter, Facebook and the likes – …but personally, I’ve never been and will never be into any “social media”) any given information such as this one.
As to OUR politicians (I’m a Luxembourger), they are worse than yours.
Nor am I. Very true about politicians there isn’t the will to do anything because of votes, and I am sure fear on their behalf. The left media is very influential.
“because of votes” – not only votes but, more important, money, see the “Panama-papers” (Cameron and many other European politicians); see also and for what concerns the US “(…) conflicts of interest, this time involving Saudi Arabia”, for instance, http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-cash-scandal-state-department-emails-reveal-clinton-foundation-link-saudi-1894941
Actually, Robert Spencer, an American, wrote a book entitled “Did Muhammad Exist” in which he went through the evidence for the existence of Muhammad. He came to the conclusion that in all likelihood Muhammad did not exist. However, if he did, he most certainly did not write the Qur’an. He is vilified by the left and groups such as CAIR for telling the truth about Muhammad and Islam.
Another person who writes in German and has made some interesting observations about the Qur’an is Christoph Luxemberg. Translations of some of his work do exist in English but still can be difficult to understand unless you have at least a basic understanding of how languages develop and change over time. Basically, he has examined a number of Qur’anic verses that don’t make a lot of sense and tried to make them intelligible. Some of his findings are quite interesting as they indicate that some of the verses seem to have come from a Christian source which may well have been the “Diatesseron”.
Luxenberg is one of the authors in the “Inârah”-series, the others being — I name them in extenso — Karl-Heinz Ohlig, Volker Popp, Claude Gilliot, Alfred-Louis de Prémare, Ibn Warraq, Pierre Larcher, Sergio Noja Noseda, Alba Fedeli, Gerd-R. Puin, Mondher Sfar, Johannes Thomas, Hans-Jörg Dohla, Markus Groβ, Filippo Ranieri, Christoph Heger, Geneviève Gobillot, J.M.F. Van Reeth, Manfred Kropp, Elisabeth Puin, Thomas Milo, Keith E. Small, Gilles Courtieu, Munther Younes, Robert M. Kerr, Muhammad Kalisch and (“post mortem”) Ignaz Goldziher. Anybody may feel free, of course, to check the “credentials” of these scientists on internet.
Thank you for adding the names of those who wrote the series. Puin, Popp, and Ohlig are known to me because some of their work has been translated into English.
This is the first I’ve seen of the Al Jazeera poll. This is huge to me. I’ve often discussed with my wife that the percentages of ISIS supporters from various countries was lower in polls than what it actually was. When country of origin is not reported,like in this instance, the percentage of ISIS supporters goes up dramatically as I would have thought.
You might think of me as crazy but I think the highest lobbies in Islam do something of a mass hypnosis / mesmerizing using black magic / black arts all over the world wide which makes people blind to their atrocities and mischief making.
It does not work on the strong, but works on the weak. And when people like Trump say that Muslims are a problem, that’s what they are afraid of, that their cat will be out of the bag and their real face will be revealed.
No need for “mass hypnosis / (…) black magic / black arts”, simply follow the money: the Saudis yearly spend a mere 87 billion dollars to “spread islam”, and an unknown part of that money goes to political friends, so for example, “Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/bernie-sanders-should-address-all-of-clintons-scandals_b_8486818.html
Aristotle once wrote: “But here is a main point: under any conceivable regime, the laws and the other institutions must be organized in a way that public posts never can be sources of profit” [“Politique”, Librairie académique Vrin, Paris 1989, V, 8, 32-33, p. 382, (in French, translation mine)].
But who the f… was Aristotle???!!!