BY Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Since Muslims regard “non-Muslims” as “pigs and “dogs,” and not as wolves, it is not enough for the disciples of Muhammad to kill non-Muslims. The proud warriors of Allah must also degrade infidels, especially Christians, Allah’s most numerous and most powerful opponents and competitors.

That’s what the Islamic war cry “Allahu Akbar” means: Allah is the greatest of the gods.

Overweening pride is the distinctive character trait of Muslims, in contrast to Christians, who exalt humility. Thus, for Muslims to degrade Christians only accentuates the lowliness in which Christian’s take pride!

To the extent that the Christian ethos influences the attitude of American diplomats and American foreign policy experts, these Americans are entrapped in an ironic and deleterious situation when dealing with Allah’s faithful. This is one, but not the only, reason why I oppose negotiations with Muslims.

In relating to the warriors of Allah, one should employ an uncompromising and coercive “either-or” approach.

Of course, such a modus operandi goes against the grain of liberals and democracies whose media are fond of Benjamin Netanyahu’s negotiating ideal of “reciprocity,” a concept utterly foreign to Islam.

Reciprocity is so foreign to Islam that its adoption by Muslims would be equivalent to a renunciation of their religion!

Yet this is precisely what is logically and politically entailed by the policy of “territory for peace” pursued by every Israeli prime minister from Yitzchak Rabin to Netanyahu, along with their countless experts in political science!

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist, contends that Muslim violence and rape, and that Muslim rage and aggression as well as Muslim irresponsibility, stem from Muslim or Islamic beliefs.

If this diagnosis is correct, we would have to conclude that Islam, above and beneath the surface, is a pathological and psychotic creed. This obviously has grave consequences, especially for Israel and America.

First, it means that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in negotiating for years with Mahmoud Abbas, the Muslim leader of the Palestinian Authority, has been dealing with a man whose Islamic beliefs render him a split personality, whereby the disparity between his words and deeds is not the result of hypocrisy – a common frailty – but of (unseen) schizophrenia.

Second, since Barack Obama is a self-professed Muslim, this means that the American people have twice elected a morally obtuse and irresponsible person as their President.

Since a person of Obama’s Islamic ethnocentric beliefs excludes natural rights, he thereby excluded “infidels” from any rights. Hence he cannot reliably distinguish right from wrong from a universalistic perspective. And since Obama also purveys the multicultural moral relativism prevalent in academia, this too will render him psychologically disinclined to disparage a Muslim as a terrorist.

Obama’s ethnocentric vacuity and moral insensitivity explains (1) his returning a statue of Winston Churchill to London; (2) his boycotting the anti-Islamic demonstration in Paris; (3) his hostility toward Israel; (4) his appointing Muslims to Executive departments and agencies, including Homeland Security and the CIA; and (5) his support of Iran despite its nuclear weapons program, and despite its threat to Western civilization.

Wafa Sultan was right in saying Islam is not a civilization. Lee Harris was right in saying Islam is the greatest enemy of civilization. From this I conclude that Islam manifests what is nothing less than religious nihilism, which is personified by Barack Obama, the occupant of the White House!☼

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Nicolai Sennels, Danish psychologist, contends that Muslim violence and rape, Muslim rage, aggression and irresponsibility, stem from Muslim beliefs, Islamic beliefs.

If this diagnosis is correct, we would have to conclude that Islam is a pathological – perhaps more precisely – a psychotic religion. There is a great deal of collateral evidence supportive of this seemingly extreme, not to say “racist” conclusion, if only because there are about 1.5 billion Muslims on planet earth; and some estimate that as much as 80 percent support Jihad – killing “infidels”!

The Center for the Study of Political Islam makes this high estimate of jihadists quite plausible. According to its February 21, 2007 issue of FrontPageMagazine, Muslims have slaughtered approximately 270 million people since the ascendancy of Muhammad!

Such slaughter is encouraged by Islam’s bellicose nature. One of its most distinctive religious imperatives is Jihad. Indeed, exterminating “infidels” is encouraged by Islamic scriptures.

Moreover, a love of death – necrophelia – call it psychotic nihilism, animates Islamic absolutism. This nihilistic love of death is manifested in Sura 9:111 of the Qur’an, which exalts the Muslim who “slays and is slain for Allah.”

The psychotically violent nature of Islam is surely the basic reason why Syrian-born psychiatrist Wafa Sultan, now living in America, does not regard Islam as a civilization.

The philosophically astute Lee Harris, who rejects cultural relativism, defines civilization in terms of four prerequisites: (1) a stable social order, (2) the co-operation of individuals pursuing their own interests, (3) the ability to tolerate or socialize with one’s neighbors, and (4) a hatred of violence.

To the preceding I would add (5) a respect for truthfulness, a quality precluded by the Muslim doctrine of taqiyya, which exalts deceit and dissimulation as virtues. Islam thus lacks the prerequisites of civilization. Hence it is all the more remarkable that Syrian-born Dr. Wafa Sultan arrived at the same conclusion!

It’s obvious from the preceding remarks that Islam and the West represent a “clash of civilizations,” which the ever correct and cautious PM Netanyahu denied in speech to a joint session of the American Congress on July 10, 1996.

Now, in view of the preceding historical facts and considerations, it should be obvious to any honest observer that genuine negotiations leading to abiding agreements between a nation like Iran, on the one hand, and the United States, on the other, are psychologically, politically, and culturally impossible.

This obviously applies to the “peace process” that has deviously described the relationship between Israel and the factitious Palestinians during the past twenty-two years.

Anyone for truth?