"You can't say that Islam is a religion of peace because Islam does not mean peace. Islam means submission. So the Muslim is one who submits. There is a place for violence in Islam. There is a place for jihad in Islam." British Islamist Anjem Choudary
Paris’ Black Friday
Radio NZ’s Guyon Espiner described the Paris Black Friday attack
as being on random rather than symbolic targets. Again the press shows its ignorance of Islam. These Muslim terrorists targeted
entertainment venues. Why? As Ayatollah Khomeini says, “There is no fun
in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious.”
Local newspapers carry the predictable repudiations of Islamic
leaders. Remember the fable of the
scorpion and the frog? These scorpions
know they are lying, even as their doctrines tell them to kill us. It’s in their nature.
Much has been written about jihadi violence and terrorism. In-depth analyses about causes, motivations
and the mental states of terrorists yield little about understanding it. They should have studied Islam.
Islam may like to be called “the religion of peace," but it was advanced by the sword. "Sabil allah fi-al-sayf" -- the path of Allah is by the sword.
Dawah baina al tarhib
wal targhib
This is the doctrine of ‘preaching between terror and lure’
or to threaten and encourage. Like
Voltaire’s apophthegm that it is good to kill an admiral from time to time as
an example to the others, the reward and success of serving one’s ideology can
be stimulated by knowing the punishment for failure. That, crucially, is the point. An example has to be made to demonstrate what
Islam can and will do were Allah’s subjects, and by this is meant everyone on
earth, to fail in their submission.
Whether it’s a single beheading or a mass murder, Allah’s punishment – and
there’s a whole lot of it in the Koran - will be meted out by his votaries to
ensure their place in paradise.
There’s no question whatsoever that it works. The Charlie Hebdo massacre had such a
salutary effect – no more cartoons of Muhammad.
Stories or films that involve Islam became supressed at birth following
the murderous fatwa on Salman Rushdie. The
mildest scrutiny of Islam is supressed without a thought given as to why a
subject worthy of the deepest criticism gets none in the popular media. This in turn reinforces its opinion of itself,
that, as the perfect system of governance, it is above and beyond judgment.
At a local level, the essential factor of sharia or hudood
punishments, such as caning, stoning to death, beheading, hanging, crucifixion,
amputation of hands and feet and so on, are that they are publicly visible penalties.
They are permanent or regular reminders to the community of the
consequences of flouting religious law.
“You don’t put down your arms in Islam, you only put them aside." Abu Qaqa (pseudonym), spokesman for Boko Haram.
Terrorism
This is the deliberately targeting of non-combatants for
political purposes, the manifestation of the threat of consequence. As a threat, it works well regardless of the
frequency of the terrorist act and is very effective in shaping behaviour. It demonstrates the results of departing from
Islamic principles such as homosexuality, polytheism, foreign policy affecting
the ummah, apostasy, uppity women and idolatry.
This is very useful when a country undergoes terrorforming prior to the
introduction of Islam, which is precisely what is happening in Europe.
Muhammad: “I have been directed to fight against people so long as they do not say: There is no god but Allah” Hadith vol 1ch 19
Lesser of Two Evils
Another aspect of preaching between terror and lure is between
the eternal horrors of hell and the carnal pleasures of paradise, and their
earthly proxies of Islamist terrorists, and Islam, the Religion of Peace. By thinking that the ‘millions of moderate Muslims’
are peace-loving families just like Christians, we in the West are choosing the
lesser of two evils. It should not be forgotten
that these millions of moderate Muslims belong to a religion that is
antithetical to democracy, and will ultimately use it to vote for its
subservience to Islam.
"The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily. Furthermore there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorised. But even such truces are precarious, inasmuch as they can, before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict." Encyclopaedia of Islam (Brill Online edition)
The Peace Bargain
Acts of terrorism, violence, dominance, disturbance,
intimidation, aggression and rioting will continue to rise. Islamic leaders will claim that only they can
bring peace and will need the government support to bring this about. This will lead to an increasing role for
imams (preachers) and muftis (interpreters of Islamic or sharia law) in general
society. The pressure on governments to
accommodate the needs of sharia law will be inevitable.
"If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel." Benjamin Netanyahu
Argumentum ad baculum
‘Argue with the cudgel’ is a call to obedience under threat
of a beating. Islamic moral militias are
commonplace wherever Muslims form a large community and demonstrates Islam’s
reliance on vigilantism to maintain its essentialist doctrine. Documentaries show Islamic State enforcers
with weapons slung over their shoulders politely telling men to cover their
women up more. In Saudi Arabia moral
transgressors risk arrest and in Iran enforcers will beat or splash with
battery acid women considered under-dressed, for example, showing a little too
much hair. In Europe gangs will politely
ask people carrying alcohol in public to dispose of it. A beating isn’t needed
when a group of young fit confident Muslims in religious costumes give you no
alternative but to obey.
This leads to ‘dominance crime’, where trivial violence and
robbery serve no other purpose than to establish superiority. It includes threatening behaviour demanding
‘respect’ and ‘intimidationism’.
The recompense of those who make war against Allah and his messenger and spread corruption in the land is that they are to be killed or crucified, or have their hand and a foot cut off on opposite sides. Koran, Maedeh, 33
Temporal Asymmetry of
Ethical Discourse.
Violence forms no part of Christian principles. With one exception, the Lord’s Resistance
Army, no Christian sect regards violence as a means to a sacred end. It’s instructive to note that excuses are
made for Islam’s violence on the basis of Christendom’s past deeds. Whether it be the Crusades where Christians
justifiably defended their own against Saracen predations, or the state-run (not
church-run) Spanish Inquisition with its overstated deaths as an over-reaction
to centuries of Islamic rule, Muslims and apologists will cite these as proof
that Christianity is just as violent as Islam.
But since the Enlightenment at the turn of the 18th
century, Christianity has not used violence to achieve its ends. So this is classic taqiyya, or dissembling.
Were Westerners more aware of their history this lie of moral relativism
would be obvious and Islam as a religion of peace would be exposed as a sick
joke.
According to all four recognised schools of Sunni jurisprudence, war against the infidel goes on in perpetuity, until "all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to Allah" (Quran 8:39).
General Discourse
Scripturally
speaking, all the passages preaching tolerance are found in the Meccan, i.e.,
early suras, and all the passages recommending killing, decapitating, and
maiming are Medinan, i.e., later events.
Thus “tolerance” has been abrogated [the doctrine by which certain
passages of the Koran are superseded by verses with a different or contrary
meaning revealed afterwards] by “intolerance.” For example, the famous verse at
sura 9.5, “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them,” is said to have
cancelled 124 verses that dictate toleration and patience. (Christopher
Hitchens – The Portable Atheist)
There
follows from this a convoluted process of logic that permits jihadis to deny
their use of violence. An Islamic State
fighter commented on the notion that Islam does not condone the violence being
perpetrated in Syria by saying, “I swear by the name of Allah, this is not
violence. We are defending our religion. The news media is against us. I swear
by Allah, we are the most gentle and forgiving. We decided to fight so that
there would be no more injustice. … You
have two options. Convert to Islam, and in this case you will be honoured, or
pay the tax of the humiliated [jizya]. If you refuse to accept one of
these two options, our future relations will be bloody. It will be a relation
that ends in your beheading.”
“Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims.” Martin Peretz, The New Republic
Attitudes to Death and the Afterlife:
Muslims
regard this life as a prelude to joining Allah for the rewards unlimited sex
and wine in paradise. This devalues the
value of human lives in the present. As
Osama bin Laden said of jihadis in his Declaration
of Jihad against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries,
“these young men love death as much as you love life.”
Their
attitudes to death are totally different from that in the West. “Muslims’ hostility towards America … was
founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that all nations who should not have
acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to
make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they
could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle
was sure to go to Paradise.” This was
written in 1786 by future presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. Slow learners, the Yanks, but Europeans seem
no quicker.
"Those who oppose the mullahs oppose Islam itself; eliminate the mullahs and Islam shall disappear in fifty years. It is only the mullahs who can bring the people into the streets and make them die for Islam - begging to have their blood shed for Islam." - Ayatollah Khomeini
The Middle-Eastern Culture of Honour and
Shame:
Bernard
Lewis’ analysis of the hatred of the West felt by Islamic nations stemmed from
shame and anger that the morally corrupt and ungodly West had dominated Islamic
culture for centuries. The religious
clash, he said, would be caused by the Islamic belief that those who didn't
honour the prophet Muhammad and his precepts must be punished, sometimes by
death, and in so punishing, Muslims were doing God's work.
The
concept of compromise simply does not exist in the Middle East – one either
wins or loses. Compromise, because it invariably entails a partial loss, is
evidently seen as bringing shame on oneself – to be avoided at all costs.
The
role of women in Islamic society is one of possession and obedience of and to
either the father or the husband. This
is assisted in part by the violent act of female genital mutilation during
childhood, principally to remove the factor of pleasure. Female chastity and fertility is considered a
family-owned asset and one that no individual woman dares to claim as her own. Females who refuse or leave an arranged
marriage or who chooses her own spouse or the father of her child has, by
definition, dishonoured her family and is seen as "too Western" for
having put her "self" first. There is no concept of "self"
in these societies in the way that it has evolved in Western terms. If these
standards are contravened, gossip and shame will lead to an inevitable death
for violating the rules of society.
Conclusion:“We Arab Muslims must start thinking of producing nuclear bombs…. Our prophet Muhammad ordered us, ‘to prepare everything possible to fight the infidels.’ These people understand only the language of power. We’ll tell the world: either you submit to Islam, or you’ll have to die.” Kuwaiti cleric Nabil Al-Awadhi
Extreme and unconstrained violence, whether as a threat to
maintain its moral position or carried by jihadis in the conquest of infidels,
has been a continuous thread throughout Islam’s 14 century history. Muslims will depreciate it, make excuses for
it, or try to make specious comparisons.
In the end, though, it is unvarnished barbarism which comes with the
territory.
The only way to counteract Islamic violence in the West is the
absolute domination and control of Islamic culture in each and every one of its
nations, even as it compromises the West’s principles. The irony here is that that is what
tyrannical Middle-Eastern states try to do, a thankless task opposed by Western
states.
Deeply rooted in pre-Islamic tribal social structures, some of the most primitive of all human drives—to conquer and dominate by force—were brilliantly sacralised in Islamic doctrine. With assassination, banditry, genocide, hatred-of-other, polygamy, rape, pillage, and slavery all divinely sanctioned in scriptures believed to be revealed by Allah himself, the world is not likely to see an end to Islam's "bloody borders" or "bloody innards" any time soon. In the traditional Arab and Muslim system, there is just too much at stake for those who win, as well as those who lose. There is no such thing as a "win-win" concept in Islam. Clare Lopez
References:
Spousal
violence - http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LE25Ak01.html
Israel v The
Islamic World - http://www.danielpipes.org/4990/arab-israeli-fatalities-rank-49th
Syrian
jihadi’s comments - http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5587/jihadist-mind
Anger, locus of control, and honour in Western and Islamic
societies: http://www.newenglishreview.org/Nicolai_Sennels/Muslims_and_Westerners%3A__The_Psychological_Differences/
