Migration as Jihad


Migration is part of the doctrine of jihad. Migration is so important that the Islamic calendar is based upon the Hijra, Mohammed’s migration from Mecca to Medina. Why? Because it was migration that lead to the creation of jihad in Medina. And it was jihad that made Islam triumphant.

In the past Muslims tended to stay in Islamic countries. Today, the new politics is to migrate to Kafir lands and immerse themselves in local politics. This is the jihad of money, writing and speech. Their politics is to bring the Sharia to Kafir culture. An example is using Islamic money is to build departments in universities that will support Sharia and never criticize Islam.

Backward Muslims and Stultified Israelis


Post by Prof. Paul Eidelberg

To begin to understand why Muslims are backward, consider this passage from G. E. Von Grunebaum’s Modern Islam (1962):

“It is essential to realize that Muslim civilization is a cultural entity that does not share our [Western] primary aspirations.  It is not vitally interested in analytical self-understanding, and it is even less interested in the structural study of other cultures, either as an end in itself or as a means of a clearer understanding of its own character and history.”

Bernard Lewis’ essay, “The Roots of Muslim Rage” (1990), not only portrays Islam’s profound hatred of the West, but its overweening arrogance and utter contempt for Western civilization.  Convinced of its possession of absolute truth, Islam cannot believe it is of any value to study cultures steeped in error.  Hence it discourages among the faithful any incentive to understand other cultures from the latter’s own point of view.

Unlike Jews (and Westerners generally), people mired in the mentality of the Qur’an or of Islamic culture lack the ability to see or respect the other fellow’s point of view and to moderate their demands accordingly. This attitude makes fools of Israeli prime ministers who negotiate with Muslims!

The late Professor Y. Harkabi, a prominent Israeli expert on Islam, failed to draw this conclusion.  Even though his book, Arab Attitudes to Israel (1972), is replete with Islamic vilification of Jews and Israel, he advocated a Muslim state in Judea and Samaria!  I mention Harkabi because he was not only a former Director of Israel Military Intelligence, but also the mentor of Shimon Peres.  Indeed, he was once head of Israel’s Command and Staff College.

The officers who graduated that College  – Ariel Sharon was one of them – were surely influenced by Harkabi’s book, whose most significant message was not the obvious hatred of the Arab world toward Israel, but Harkabi’s conclusion that justice favors neither side of the Arab-Israel conflict!

Harkabi’s moral equivalency is rooted in cultural relativism, a doctrine to which he explicitly subscribed.

This university-bred doctrine, which has tainted Israel’s ruling elites, has undermined wholehearted confidence in the justice of Israel’s cause.  This doctrine is foreign to Islam.  Utterly convinced of the absolute justice of their cause, Muslims look upon Jews who defend themselves as “aggressors.”  That Jews should kill Muslims (even in self-defense) enrages these Quranic believers and arouses in them a relentless and all-consuming desire for revenge unlimited by the passage of time.

The civilized idea of “enemies in war, in peace friends” – proclaimed in the American Declaration of Independence – contradicts Islamic culture and theology.  This idea presupposes an international community of sovereign nation-states which, despite frequent wars, acknowledges that people can be friends despite their differences.  Nothing in Islamic history affirms this basic principle of civilization.  To reject this principle is to exalt war on the one hand, and to deny the sanctity of human life on the other – precisely the ethos of Jihad.

There is but one honest conclusion to be drawn from this fourteen-century Islamic ethos:  Israel will not enjoy genuine peace with its neighbors so long as Muslims remain Muslims! (Syrian-born psychiatrist Dr. Wafa Sultan concludes that Islam must be “transformed,” not merely “reformed.”)

Harkabi’s aforementioned book provides an abundance of documentary evidence to confirm this conclusion, a conclusion obscured by his cultural relativism.  This relativism has stultified the mentality of Israel’s ruling elites: politicians and judges, academics and journalists.  Despite Arab-Islamic barbarism, they stubbornly refuse to acknowledge and confront the enormity of evil that animates Israel’s enemies, and they persist in negotiating with these Janus-faced Jew-haters whose fanaticism, sterility, and love of death constitute the negation of civilization.

Israel desperately needs a new dispensation, one that transcends our stupefying and spiritless era of relativism. Needed is a dispensation conducive to the ascendancy of men of truth and moral courage.  I see no such men in the secular democratic world, enslaved in nihilism, materialism, and moral egalitarianism –    a world that blurs distinctions between good and evil and between what is noble and what is base.  Needed, therefore, is a renaissance of Hebraic civilization.

The first, practical step in this renaissance is to advance into leadership a man who will take a non-compromising position on the Land of Israel.  By itself, this position entails fidelity to the People of Israel and the Torah.  This bold refusal to negotiate over the Land of Israel will generate the spiritual courage required for a renaissance of Hebraic civilization, whose rationality, creativity and love of life constitute the West’s most precious beliefs and values.

REFUGEES


A picture is worth a thousand words!

Socialist Hollande To Deny Public Opinion and Open France’s Doors To Mid-East “Refugees”…


The EU is committing social suicide, they will never be able to recover from bringing in these Muslim invaders. By mid century Muslims will be the majority in some countries and that will be the end. Lets hope we can stop the movement to bring more here here before its to late.

Why Islam is not and can not be compatible with Western Civilization!


Muslims ‘Procreate Like Mushrooms After the Rain,’ ‘The Problem is Islam,’ says a Florida Professor.

Reports: Last Year’s ISIS Terrorists are This Year’s Mid-East Refugees – Planes, Trains and Automobiles…


Letting all the Muslims in is the biggest mistake we have ever made and will likely lead to the end of Western Civilization. Why haven’t any Muslim countries taken them in? Maybe this is civilization Jihad as developed by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Sudden Jihad Syndrome


Sudden jihad syndrome was coined by Daniel Pipes, an excellent scholar. Jihad, such as the recent attack in Chattanooga seem to done by “nice” people. How do we explain “nice Muslims” who commit jihad? Some nice Muslims are simply do not follow much of Islam. They are Islam, light. Then there are other nice Muslims who know all of Islam, including jihad, who are pleasant because they need to live in our society. But deep within, they have the heart of a jihadist which can manifest suddenly.

How can we tell the difference? Are they really a friend or a deceiver? There is no way to know the heart of a Muslim.

The Real Islam


Incredible. This video lets you see how radical Islam has made terror and violence an integral part of life in many, once very normal, Muslim cities such as Beirut, Tehran, Gaza and even Copenhagen which has absorbed a large number of Muslims in recent years… We have not yet woken up. This is a war of ideology and there are some very hateful, violent Muslims who are determined to make the world look and act in accordance with their beliefs.
In the name of Allah.

“Prepare for a Nuclear Iran”


Posts by Eidelberg [2008] and Bolton [2009]

Essay 1: “Iran: Our Most Dangerous Enemy” 

Paul Eidelberg (May 9, 2008)

Iran has been at war with the United States and Israel ever since the Khomeini-inspired Iranian Revolution of 1979.  This is, or may become, the most far-reaching revolution in human history.  Iran is not only the epicenter of international terrorism. Iran’s ultimate goal is to restore the Persian Empire and spread Shiite Islam throughout the world.  This is not fantasy….

Iran is gaining decisive influence on Syria and Iraq. Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, virtually rules Lebanon. [Hamas is another proxy of Iran, has access to the Sinai where it could threaten Egypt].

If this was not enough, Iran controls the world’s spigot of oil flowing through the Persian Gulf. This nation of 70 million people can wreck the world’s economy. With control of the vast oil resources of the Persian Gulf, a nuclear-armed Iran, with its long-range Silkworm ballistic missiles, would cow an already craven Europe, without which the American economy would utterly collapse, period.

Hence, the question arises: “Will the U.S. or will Israel launch a preemptive attack on Iran, the engine of Islamic imperialism?” At stake is the survival of Western civilization. [Iran’s] maledictions, “death to America” and “death to Israel” speak of a world without Christianity and Judaism.

The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate of December 2007 reported that Iran had ceased its nuclear development program in 2003. Former UN Ambassador John Bolton wrote an excoriating critique of the NIE report in The Washington Post (December 7, 2007).  He warned that “the NIE opens the way for Iran to achieve its military nuclear ambitions in an essentially unmolested fashion, to the detriment of us all” (my emphasis). This is precisely why Mr. Bolton wrote an op-ed piece in The Wall Street Journal virtually encouraging Israel to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran. He boldly asserted that the US should support Israel before, during, and after such a strike – should it take place.  [Hardly to be expected with Obama in the White House.]

Essay 2: “It’s Crunch Time for Israel on Iran”

John Bolton (July 28, 2009)

It’s routine for senior American officials to descend on Jerusalem. Most important was a visit of [former] Defense Secretary Robert Gates. His central objective was to dissuade Israel from carrying out military strikes against Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities. Under the guise of counseling “patience,” Mr. Gates conveyed President Barack Obama’s emphatic thumbs down on military force.

[Meanwhile], Iran’s progress with nuclear weapons and air defenses means that Israel’s military option is declining over time. Worse, Mr. Obama has no new strategic thinking on Iran. He vaguely promises to offer Tehran the carrot of diplomacy followed by an empty threat of sanctions down the road if Iran does not comply with the U.S.’s requests. This is precisely the European Union’s approach, which has failed for over six years.

Unlike Obama, Israel sees the diplomatic and military situation concerning Iran in a very inauspicious light. Israel fears that the Obama administration, once ensnared in negotiations, will find it very hard to extricate itself. The Israelis are probably right. To prove the success of his “open hand” or “outreach” policy, Mr. Obama will declare victory for “diplomacy” even if it means little to no gains on Iran’s nuclear program.

Under the worst-case scenario, Iran will continue improving its nuclear facilities and Mr. Obama will become the first U.S. president to tie the issue of Iran’s nuclear capabilities into negotiations about Israel’s nuclear capabilities.

Relations between the U.S. and Israel are more strained now than at any time since the 1956 Suez Canal crisis. Obama’s message to Israel (via Gates) not to attack Iran, and the U.S. pressure he brought to bear, highlight the weight of Israel’s lonely burden.

Striking Iran’s nuclear program will not be precipitous or poorly thought out. Israel’s attack, if it happens, will have followed enormously difficult deliberation over terrible imponderables, and years of patiently waiting on innumerable failed diplomatic efforts by the United States.

Absent Israeli action, prepare for a nuclear Iran.

Islam vs. all other religions for first place in the murder category


Determining the validity or truth of an idea or statement isn’t always easy and never has been easy. A fourteenth-century philosopher William of Occam had a useful rule of thumb for this quandary. We now know it as Occam’s Razor, and it is often stated thusly: “The simplest explanation is usually the best.”
The original Latin –“Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate” — adds a wrinkle. This translates roughly, “Multiple variables are not to be posited without necessity.”
A more modern form of this principle is called the Duck test which is a humorous term for a form of inductive reasoning. This is its usual expression: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.