The debate around Muslim violence all too often centers around doctrine—around what the Koran and Hadith (words and deeds of Muhammad) really mean and say. Forgotten in this debate is that Islamic scriptures are unnecessary in determining whether Islam teaches violence and war against non-Muslims.
History suffices.
Consider some facts, attested to by both Muslim and non-Muslim primary historic sources: A mere decade after the birth of Islam in the 7th century, the jihad burst out of Arabia. In just a few decades, Muslims had permanently conquered what was then two-thirds of the Christian world. The heart of the Muslim world today—nations like Egypt, Syria, all of North Africa, Turkey and more—were, in the 7th century, the heart of Christendom.
Thereafter it was a continuous war on Christian Europe. Among other nations and territories that were attacked and/or came under Muslim domination throughout the centuries are (to give them their modern names and in no particular order): Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Sicily, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary, Greece, Russia, Poland, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Lithuania, Romania, Albania, Serbia, Armenia, Georgia, Crete, Cyprus, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Macedonia, Belarus, Malta, Sardinia, Moldova, Slovakia, and Montenegro.
Less than three decades after the traditional date of Islam’s founding (622), three of the five original Christian centers (“sees”) founded by the apostles—in Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem—were forever swallowed up by Islam; the fourth, Constantinople, valiantly resisted the Islamic onslaught for centuries, but was finally conquered in the name of Islam in 1453. Though sacked and burned by Muslims as early as 846, only distant Rome—the Vatican, fifth of the ancient Christian sees—remained unconquered.
The few European regions that escaped direct Islamic occupation due to their northwest remoteness include Great Britain, Scandinavia, and Germany. That, of course, does not mean that they were not attacked by Islam. Indeed, in the furthest northwest of Europe, in Iceland, Christians used to pray that God save them from the “terror of the Turk.” This was not mere paranoia; as late as 1627, Muslim corsairs raided the northern Christian island seizing four hundred captives and selling them in the slave markets of Algiers.
Nor did America escape. A few years after the formation of the United States, in 1800, American trading ships in the Mediterranean were plundered and their sailors enslaved by Muslim corsairs. The ambassador of Tripoli explained to Thomas Jefferson that it was a Muslim’s right and duty to make war upon non-Muslims wherever they could be found, and to enslave as many as they could take as prisoners.
There was no mystery about Islam in those days. As early as the 8th century, Byzantine chronicler Theophanes wrote in his Chronographia:
He [Muhammad] taught those who gave ear to him that the one slaying the enemy — or being slain by the enemy — entered into paradise [e.g., Koran 9:111]. And he said paradise was carnal and sensual — orgies of eating, drinking, and women. Also, there was a river of wine … and the woman were of another sort, and the duration of sex greatly prolonged and its pleasure long-enduring [e.g., 56: 7-40, 78:31, 55:70-77]. And all sorts of other nonsense.
Six hundred years later, in the 14th century, Byzantine emperor Paleologus II told a Muslim scholar: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman — such as the command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Such was the honesty of interfaith dialoguing in former times.
It deserves repeating, by the standards of historiography, the aforementioned historical outline is unassailable, and attested to by both Muslim and European sources, from the traditional beginning of Islam till the modern era.
In short, regardless of what the Koran and other Islamic scriptures really “mean,” for roughly one millennium—punctuated by a Crusader-rebuttal that the modern West is obsessed with demonizing—Muslims waged unrelenting war on the West. And they did and continue doing so in the name of Islam.
——
And therein lies the rub: Today, whether as taught in high school or graduate school, whether as portrayed by Hollywood or the news media, the predominant historic narrative is that Muslims are the historic “victims” of “intolerant” Western Christians. (Watch my response to a Fox News host wondering why Christians have always persecuted Muslims.)
So here we are, paying the price of being an ahistorical society: A few years after the Islamic strikes of 9/11—merely the latest in the centuries-long, continents-wide jihad on the West—Americans elected (twice) a man with a Muslim name and heritage for president; a man who openly empowers the same Islamic ideology that Western warriors fought for centuries.
Surely the United States’ European forebears—who at one time or another either fought off or were conquered by Islam—must be turning in their graves.
But all this is history, you say? Why rehash it? Why not let it be and move on, begin a new chapter of mutual tolerance and respect, even if history must be “touched up” a bit?
This would be a somewhat plausible position if not for the fact that, all around the globe, Muslims are still exhibiting the same imperial impulse and intolerant supremacism that their conquering forbears did. The only difference is that the Muslim world is currently incapable of defeating the West through a conventional war.
Yet this may not even be necessary. Thanks to the West’s ignorance of history, Muslims are allowed to flood Europe, so that hardly a day now passes without headlines of Muslim on non-Muslim violence. Most recently—or at least as of this writing—Muslims invaded a church in France, forced the priest on his knees, and slit his throat.
All this leads to another, equally important point: If the true history of the West and Islam is being turned upside down, what other historical “truths” being peddled around today are equally false? The narrative concerning Islam’s alleged peacefulness is only being questioned because the world sees Muslims committing violence on a daily basis. But surely there are other nefarious and seditious forces that are intelligent enough not to expose themselves?
In the future (whatever one there may be) the histories written about our times will likely stress how our era, ironically called the “information age,” was not an age when people were so well informed, but rather an age when disinformation was so widespread and unquestioned that generations of people lived in bubbles of alternate realities—till they were finally popped.
Illuminating. As always. I live in a country – India – that has 15% Muslim population. A country that had been vivisected in the name of religion 70 years ago. A country where “secular” politicians pamper the Muslims because it is believed that Muslims vote as a block. I wonder where we are heading.
The Muslim war lords dominated India once, no doubt they will try again.
“There was no mystery about Islam in those days.”
There was no political correctness in those days.
When I read of the history of Islamic violence, as Islam’s primary modus operandi in spreading their, uh, ‘religion’, I cannae but wonder at the almost irresistible simplicity with which Islam seems to fit the agenda of some bad actors.
The Agenda 21 enthusiasts wish to make Islam the state religion. The reasons why should be clear. Via Agenda 21, the Left means to create a ‘new world order’ which would be in effect a global police state. What religion better to justify the absolute control of society than the religion of ultimate oppression, Islam?
Yes the Globalists, at he heart of power at the UN, know that Islam is the perfect vehicle, combined with todays technology, to control the masses and enslave them.
Those Agenda 21, One World Globalists are completely NUTS, if they think THEY will be in charge, when they allow Islam to take over!
OWG is all about “I will be the King and Ruler of the World!”
Pinky: Gee, Brain, what do you want to do tonight?
Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky – Try to take over the world!
Islam conquers not because of the prowess of it’s warriors or the intelligence of it’s generals – usually, they’re deficient in these areas – but from sheer puppy persistence. Sometimes, too, they are invited into a society because of internal dissensions. Little by little, they conquer and keep what they conquer because the Quran gives them nothing else to do but to dominate.
For, Sharia is the rule of aggressive imbeciles over cowed geniuses.
Being ‘promised’ 72 virgins in “allah’s” House of Prostitution for dying in the (false) name of “allah”, is a great incentive to fight like an un-killable demon!
“In the future (whatever one there may be) the histories written about our times will likely stress how our era, ironically called the “information age,” was not an age when people were so well informed, but rather an age when disinformation was so widespread and unquestioned that generations of people lived in bubbles of alternate realities—till they were finally popped.”
——–
An incisive observation, and, sadly, one that reveals the tragedy — and, the irony — of our present era. As Mr. Ibrahim rightly observes, information has never been so readily or so extensively available at any point throughout human history as it is today, what with the relatively inexpensive individual cost and the collective breadth of print media, the Internet, television media, global telecom networks, “guerrilla” reporting and cellphone photojournalism, etc. And, yet, despite the ready availability of information derived from all of these conduits of communication and learning, which should allow basic, intrinisic and uncontroversial historical, theological and cultural facts and truths to be readily acknowledged (to wit, Islam’s 1,400-year history of conquests, genocides, atrocities, aggressions, and oppression), we witness — rather perversely and counter-intuitively — the subversion and the displacement of these truths via blatant, unabashed historical revisionism, theological ignorance and naivete, political correctness, moral relativism and self-serving, sanctimonious political pandering.
The situation is tragic beyond belief. If we continue along the present path, in which the supremacist, fascistic ideology of “Submission” is allowed to metastisize and conquer the globe, then, historians (such as they will be) of the future will look back on us as dim-witted, weak-willed dhimmi fools who lacked the will and the desire to preserve their own secular culture and societies.
This is absolutely correct …and it states FACTS that I have not heard elsewhere!
Thank you for posting. I will add this to my ‘Collected Wisdom’ document on Islam
For Islamophiles history, the contemporary examples of Islamic supremacism and aggression, the universal abuse of non Muslims by Muslims in ALL Muslim majority places and the clear injunctions to expand and conquer in the name of Allah, along with the evil, violent, abusive, immoral, and excessive life of the “prophet” are of no consequence. The west is determined to foist Islam on us.
For Islamophiles history, the contemporary examples of Islamic supremacism and aggression, the universal abuse of non Muslims by Muslims in ALL Muslim majority places and the clear injunctions to expand and conquer in the name of Allah, along with the evil, violent, abusive, immoral, and excessive life of the “prophet” are of no consequence. The west is determined to foist Islam on us.
As Raymond Ibrahim said in a previous article, the leaders of the West, are fools, or liars, or both. Both are true I believe, as any reasonably educated person is surely aware of the history of Islam from it’s inception. We learned it in High School. It was a general overview, yes, but we knew the basic facts. And surely, if persons in leadership do NOT know, then it is their business to find out, and not to believe the historical rubbish that we are being handed today with regard to the whole of the last 1400 years. Or, pretend to believe. They have an agenda that we are not being told about, for sure.
I wanted to ask Mr. Ibrahim a question from this article; you said ” what other historical “truths” being peddled around today are equally false? ” And “But surely there are other nefarious and seditious forces that are intelligent enough not to expose themselves?” Could you expand on what you mean by these statements? Thank you.
I’d like to hear an answer to that question as well. Mr. Ibrahim, a Coptic Christian, is absolutely brilliant, and pulls no punches.
I believe the truth about communism and national socialism are being slowly and nefariously suppressed by those in control. Note how the leftist media always seems to blame the persecution of Muslims on the Right and comparisons are drawn between the modern Right and Nazism, which by itself was National Socialist. I also believe a lot of the truth about the holocaust are beginning to be shoved aside to be eventually swept into the dustbin of history. Soon names like Anne Frank and Elie Wiesel will be just some Jewish names.
Another historical truth that is being falsely pedaled is the history of the Crusades and, I might add, the Conquistadors.
I agree utterly. The history of Islam that is being pedalled about the world today is mendacious rot. A willful and deliberate perversion of truth. It was never a “religion of peace”, but a system of conquest by the sword. That is how it started, and that is how it very obviously remains.
We hear such self-pitying drivel about “the suffering of the poor Muslim people at the hands of the Crusaders”, but in actual fact, the Crusades were the response to Muslim invasions on what was once land occupied primarily by Christians. Once Islam was powerful enough, Muslim armies invaded these lands and brutally murdered, oppressed, enslaved, and taxed the Christians living in those lands. In response, the Roman Catholic Church and Christian kings from Europe initiated the Crusades to reclaim the land the Muslims had taken. And that is historical fact.
The Arab army led by Amr ibn al ‘Aas sacked the city of Alexandria in 640 or 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. When the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar (also spelled ‘Omar’) on what to do with the library he gave the infamous answer: “They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous.” It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers. Burning and destruction of the Library of Alexandria was reported to be the first act of sacking after Amr ibn al ‘Aas forces entered the city. It was also said that the Library’s collection was still substantial enough at this late date to provide six months’ worth of fuel for the baths. There is some controversy as to all of this being factual, but the fact remains that the Muslims under al ‘ Aas did the final burning and destruction of the library and destroy all of the ancient manuscripts in the 640s.
The Arab army led by Amr ibn al ‘Aas sacked the city of Alexandria in 640 or 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. When the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar (also spelled ‘Omar’) on what to do with the library he gave the infamous answer: “They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous.” It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers. Burning and destruction of the Library of Alexandria was reported to be the first act of sacking after Amr ibn al ‘Aas forces entered the city. It was also said that the Library’s collection was still substantial enough at this late date to provide six months’ worth of fuel for the baths. There is some controversy as to all of this being factual, but the fact remains that the Muslims under al ‘ Aas did the final burning and destruction of the library and destroy all of the ancient manuscripts in the 640s.
The Arab army led by Amr ibn al ‘Aas sacked the city of Alexandria in 640 or 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. When the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar (also spelled ‘Omar’) on what to do with the library he gave the infamous answer: “They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous.” It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers. Burning and destruction of the Library of Alexandria was reported to be the first act of sacking after Amr ibn al ‘Aas forces entered the city. It was also said that the Library’s collection was still substantial enough at this late date to provide six months’ worth of fuel for the baths. There is some controversy as to all of this being factual, but the fact remains that the Muslims under al ‘ Aas did the final burning and destruction of the library and destroy all of the ancient manuscripts in the 640s.
The Arab army led by Amr ibn al ‘Aas sacked the city of Alexandria in 640 or 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. When the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar (also spelled ‘Omar’) on what to do with the library he gave the infamous answer: “They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous.” It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers. Burning and destruction of the Library of Alexandria was reported to be the first act of sacking after Amr ibn al ‘Aas forces entered the city. It was also said that the Library’s collection was still substantial enough at this late date to provide six months’ worth of fuel for the baths. There is some controversy as to all of this being factual, but the fact remains that the Muslims under al ‘ Aas did the final burning and destruction of the library and destroy all of the ancient manuscripts in the 640s.
The Arab army led by Amr ibn al ‘Aas sacked the city of Alexandria in 640 or 642 after the Byzantine army was defeated at the Battle of Heliopolis. When the commander Amr ibn al-Aas asked the Caliph Umar (also spelled ‘Omar’) on what to do with the library he gave the infamous answer: “They will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, in which case they are superfluous.” It is said that the Arabs subsequently burned the books to heat bathwater for the soldiers. Burning and destruction of the Library of Alexandria was reported to be the first act of sacking after Amr ibn al ‘Aas forces entered the city. It was also said that the Library’s collection was still substantial enough at this late date to provide six months’ worth of fuel for the baths. There is some controversy as to all of this being factual, but the fact remains that the Muslims under al ‘ Aas did the final burning and destruction of the library and destroy all of the ancient manuscripts in the 640s.
This is precisely why Hillary Clinton must not be elected. Nor should any politicians who cater to every whim of the Muslim invaders.
Now there you go again talking about Baraq O Bamah
;>D
islam or isham sounds better. muslim or mushams prefer to kill Christians or Jews but occasionally kill homosexuals. But when the time comes will kill liberals as well. The time being, obama or obuma and clinton are allowing mushams into the country by the train load. They are beefing up their side of the coming civil war against Catholics, Protestants, & Hebrew Jews, republicans and conseratives . A lot of Jews are liberals but that will make them more of a target come that time. They might pretend to not acknowledge the problem they are supporting & creating but their time is very limited and short. The islamic war is going to really explode come the next five years of time. Beware, prepare and give voice. Vote Trump God bless.