Towards the West's Destruction, Every Knee Must Bend

Catholic clerics in El Paso (Image: (Associated Press)

We could all be forgiven for assuming that the Religion of Peace™ had never had any involvement in the enslavement and exploitation of black people, to hear the Islamic preachers featured below talk.  But who can truly blame them for taking the opportunity of exploiting the current insanity and naivity prevalent in the West with regard to the excesses of the Black Lives Matter movement in order to advance Islam?

In this photo, for instance, are some of the nice but naive Vicar of Rome's nice but naive representatives in El Paso, including a bishop,  paying homage to the movement.

Grab a sick bag and look at this!

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeyUAoe9JRw

This Lowell, Massachusetts, policeman had more gumption and commonsense when, despite raucous intimidatory demands that he "take a knee" he calmly and steadfastly refused to do so.

 So, too, did black Georgia State Trooper O'Neal Saddler, who explained that he kneels only before God, a principle that accords with many Jews and others, including this rabbi:

The link above also shows that State Trooper Saddler has also sensibly observed that 'the actions of bad officers don't make me or other good officers bad'. 

One of the latest targets of the Black Lives Matter movement has been the memorial in Boston to the 54th Massachusetts Regiment, that band of black Civil War heroes and their young white commander, Captain Robert Gould Shaw, whose courage and sacrifice in the cause of human dignity and freedom was so memorably told in the 1989 movie Glory.

Another target, of course, has been Sir Winston Churchill's statue near the Houses of Parliament in London.  For shame.

Heaven help anybody who dares to suggest that a better slogan than Black Lives Matter is the inclusive All Lives Matter, which embraces every human being, or who, while conceding that his was a terrible, unconscionable way to die and that Derek Chauvin thgoroughly deserves punishment for his brutal actions, that there are worthier heroes for Afro-Americans than a career criminal such as George Floyd.  If that brave and articulate black American, the estimable Candace Owens, could not escape calumny for saying so, what hope is there for the rest of us from demonisation as racists by political "progressives"?

Is there no limit to this demented thirst for revenge against all white people (including Jews who don't know or don't care that the Black Lives Matter movement is deeply infested with hostility towards both Jews and Israel) for the racist behaviour of some?  Who, in all honesty, can deny that much of what we are seeing is racism in reverse?

Meanwhile, here are the two Olde Tyme preachers I referred to in the introductory sentence, making mischief out of these crazy times in which we are now suddenly embroiled.

Below is Islamic scholar Nafis Abu Zayd Sparrow of Philadelphia, where he was formerly an imam, and is now librarian at the Maktabah Ibn Taymiyyah Islamic Library and Learning Center,  talking on 2 June, in the wake of George Floyd's death.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HVxtVmQepA

To quote Memri TV):

'Comparing the black community to the Children of Israel, whom he said would kill their own prophets, he said that one must fight in order to attain freedom and that this is what had been advocated and spoken about by Malcolm X, whom he said had been the leader that had adhered most closely to the Quran and the Sunnah.

 Sparrow said that if people who are fed up with the system want to make a difference, they must become a formidable and respected foe. He explained that it takes some "real fighting" to stand up, that revolution requires bloodshed, and that America's indigenous blacks should fight for their own land, similar to how Asians have Chinatown and how the Jews in New York have their own "police state" [Emphasis added]'

 Sparrow elaborated that he is "all for" doing what Malcolm X had advocated, and he said that since people are not ready for any form of Jihad, they should be quiet, supplicate to Allah, and inspire others.....' 

And here, on 4 June, is British Islamic scholar Sheikh Haitham Al-Haddad, of Palestinian background, a board member of several Islamic organisations, talking in the aftermath of George Floyd's death ("Surrender yourself to the real superpower -- Allah.").

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDAX5yE2ZHk

 To quote Memri TV:

'He said that democracy is being abused by powerful people, that his idea for "post-democracy" is a merge between democracy and Islam, and that the only solution for abuse of power is submission to Allah [Emphasis added].

More Reasons for a "Phobia"

Another instance of the "cultural enrichment" that Islam exports to western countries and which western feminists, with a few honourable exceptions, so studiously ignore.  I wish I could dub him an Olde Tyme preacher but he is preaching misogyny for the here and now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTlMX9Gu1o0

To quote the uploader, Memri.org:

'In a fatwa session posted online, Kuwaiti sheikh Othman Al-Khamis cited the Quranic verse pertaining to wife-beating, and said: "The beatings must not be hard. It is more of a psychological beating, the purpose of which is to humiliate the wife." He further explained that "he shouldn't break her bones, and he shouldn't beat her on the face." A video of his statements was posted on his YouTube channel on January 31.'

Another Islamic expositor, this one based in Norway:

                                          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaaqqLEc01U
To quote the same uploader:

'Mullah Fateh Krekar, former founder and leader of the Sunni terrorist group Ansar Al-Islam, said that "all the world’s powers combined" cannot beat the ideology of the Islamic State organization. Mullah Krekar, whose original name is Najmaddin Faraj Ahmad, arrived in Norway in 1991 as a refugee and has been living there since. In an interview with NRT TV, a channel frannel from Iraqi Kurdistan, Krekar said that if the Islamic State is eliminated, a similar group will emerge, because its ideology is rooted in literary sources that are unchangeable, like the Quran and the Hadith. He labeled President Trump's policies "false bravado" and challenged him to send his "most courageous men" to Libya to fight the "lions of Islam." The interview aired on February 20.'

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose ...

"The more things change, the more they stay the same."

So observed the French wit Alphonse Karr in 1849.

Looking through a newspaper collection recently for something entirely unrelated to the Middle East, I spotted the following, and thought of that phrase, though on second thoughts maybe it's not so apt, given that certain trends in history roll on and gain momentum.

Edinburgh Evening News, 22 March 1902:

Wanatah [Indiana] Mirror, 25 January 1912:

Ibid.  Opening paragraphs in close-up:

Bedford [UK] Daily Mail, 4 June 1912 (is this what drives Viktor Orban?):

The Globe [UK], 28 November 1913):

Daily Mirror [UK], 2 June 1914

Cambridge [UK] Independent Press, 10 December 1915:

I'm sure there are a lot more where those came from.
 
Meanwhile, in the Middle East some things have stayed the same since the 7th century, as this fine article observes:

True peace requires addressing the deep sources of the conflict. Those lay with the Arab and Muslim reaction to the return of the Jewish people to powerful sovereignty in their ancient homeland. As far as Muslim theology and Arab practice were concerned, the Jews were non-believers, only to be tolerated, never as equals. They should have never been allowed to undermine Muslim rule over the lands, which the Jews claimed as their homeland, but the Arabs viewed as exclusively theirs since conquering them in the seventh century.

The return of the Jewish people to restored sovereignty in their ancient homeland, required Arabs and Muslims to accept that a people, whom they have for centuries treated as inferiors, worthy of contempt, were now claiming equality and exercising power in their midst.

This historical “Chutzpah” is what drove the Arab League to violently reject any kind of plan that would grant the Jewish people equal sovereignty over any part of “Muslim land”​, free from their control. This unnatural historical development, in Arab eyes, led Arab governments to take revenge and forcefully expel hundreds of thousands of Jews, living in their midst, often in communities predating the birth of Islam, just after the establishment of the State of Israel.

It is also the reason why Arab states kept the Arabs who were displaced during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and their millions of descendants, ​ as perpetual “refugees” – to deprive the Jewish state of legitimacy and peace.  It is the reason that even after losing repeated military wars against the State of Israel, Arab countries have continued their diplomatic and economic war against it to this day. Even Jordan and Egypt, that have signed nominal peace agreements with Israel, have more of a ‘mutual non-attack’ agreements, rather than genuine peace.

The animosity to the concept of the Jewish sovereignty in the Arab Middle East is simply too big. This attitude towards the Jewish state is an Arab – and Muslim – issue, and not only a Palestinian one. The Palestinians have been at the forefront of this Arab and Muslim intolerance, but they are not its creators. They are the thin end of the wedge by which the Arab and Muslim world wages its war against a sovereign Jewish people.

If the word peace is ever to truly describe the situation between Israel and its neighbors, it requires the Arab and Muslim world to address the roots of their intolerance. It requires them to accept the Jews as their equals and as an indigenous people who have come home. This was always too large a task to be undertaken by the Palestinians. Only Arabs and Muslims together can legitimize a different theological interpretation of the Jewish presence in their midst: no longer inferiors and no longer foreigners. In doing so, they can enable and legitimize practical solutions in Jerusalem that accept the centrality of the city to the Jewish people, and to the manufactured problem of the “refugees”, by finally rehabilitating them and absorbing them as fellow Arabs...."

And as the Palestinian envoy to Iran, Salah Zawawi, reminds us in a recent interview on Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV:

"Our war is not only with this Zionist enemy. We are fighting a 100-year-old Western enterprise, which is ongoing. This enterprise does not target a part of Palestine, or even Palestine in its entirety. Its goal is to establish the Greater Israel, which would control disintegrated Arab and Islamic countries, and indeed, this is happening today in our Islamic world. ...This way, our enemy along with its defenders and masters, would complete their plan to turn us into servants, if not slaves, in this region, and to plunder our resources.

When they talk about the signing of the nuclear agreement and whatever, they are truly terrified. If Iran produces a nuclear bomb - and I pray to Allah that Iran will produce 1,000 nuclear bombs - it will not be directed against any Arab or Islamic country. It will be used to defend, at the very least, the Islamic republic and its principles."

Moreover, to quote a commenter on this article: 

Commenter:

"I have degrees in Middle Eastern Studies and Arabic. I've spent more time than I care to recall studying Islam and its adherents. I've lectured Army and DIA personnel on Salafist terrorism.

Islam has never, ever been a 'byword for benign enlightenment.' It has always, from its triumph at Yathrib, been a religion of oppression, slavery, and war. That reformers occasionally exist does not rescue the faith from the weight of its history. And note that the reformers always fail.

Reason #1: Reform is bid'a (innovation), and bid'a is heresy, and willing heresy is apostasy, and Muslim apostates are put to death."

A commenter in response:

'Excellent post but, "And note that the reformers always fail." is not true. I think what you mean is that the peaceful ones always fail, which is true. When Islam was pacified by the influence and strength of Western culture it was denatured and mutated into something quite different. Now the reformists are trying to purge the Munafiqun (the hypocrites) from their community and purify the faith into one strong, tight fist with which to smash the infidels into submission... just as Abu Bakr (The Sword of Allah) did during the Apostasy Wars. Islam goes through these undulating waves of dilution (under the influence of kaffir civilisations) and then purification, by reformists trying to return to the original source material found in the Hadith and Quran; the terrorist organisations are simply the peak of the iceberg in a much larger movement in the Islamic world.

Sadly, the reformists are winning.'

Original Commenter:

"I don't disagree, but Khālid ibn al-Walīd was called Sword of Allah, not Abu Bakr."

Monsieur Millière Warns The West: "France is completely lost ... Political correctness works" (video)

'Islam wants to conquer Europe and militant Muslims know they can succeed and I think they are right.

One of my friends who was a survivor of Auschwitz said to me: "The people who were pessimistic survived.  The people who were optimistic died."...
  
France is completely lost ....

The French press lie all the time.... The media is largely in the hands of the Left....  

The French don't know how to fight but they do know something: preemptive surrender....  

Muslims use two tools to conquer Europe.  First, attacks.  Second, "Dawah": invitation to submit to Islam.... 

Political correctness works ... 

The Left and Islam have something in common: they want to destroy Western civilisation.... Islam is a totalitarian political movement. ... Islam is fighting a war against the West, against freedom.... I am here [the USA, to which he emigrated two months ago] because I want to win.... We have to choose strength.'

The speaker is a French philosemitic pro-Israel intellectual, Guy Millière, about whom I have blogged before.

By "political correctness" he means the leftist-driven outrage against "Islamophobia" which has ensured that virtually nothing critical of islamifiction or of the current suicidal madness engulfing Europe gets published in book form, whereas there are now books a-plenty advocating for the Muslim-abundant Europe we are witnessing, from the jihadist aspects of which French elites seem to think France can be immune through the emergence a "friendly" sui generis French Islam.

 This video (hat tip Vlad Tepes blog) shows his speech at last month's  "Can Israel Co-Exist With The West?" conference in America.

See also this new article by Yves Mamou

Meanwhile, regarding Trump and Muslim immigration ...

Islamic Supremacism, Iran, Saudi Arabia, The Bomb, & Obama's Attitude To Israel

 Here's the urbane Saudi Arabian ambassador to Washington, speaking to CNN's Wolf Blitzer about Iran's nuclear capability and about Yemen, but understandably not giving much away:

It's perhaps best to view this interview of Jamie Glazov with scholar Daniel Greenfield, alter ago of blogger  "Sultan Knish", with a stiff whisky or three at the ready:

Incidentally the translation of the poster in the picture below concerning Iranian-backed rebels in Yemen reflects the honest translation of "Allahu Akhbar",  the true meaning of which Greenfield discusses in the first part of the video, which refers to his post here, in which he states inter alia:

'Allahu Akbar doesn't mean Allah is Great, in a "Isn't 'Allah and the Virgins of Paradise' a great band". It's more like Allah is Greatest or Superior. And if you're on the right side of the cockpit door, the one doing the shouting 'Allahu Akbar' means that Allah is superior to your country and to you. And one of his followers is about to do his best to show you why.

 The tactic of Islamic propagandists and their Western enablers has been to mainstream and normalize. In their translations, "Allahu Akbar" becomes "God is Great". Not Allah, but God. And not Greater, but Great. The differences are significant. Every news story takes great care to explain that ...Allahu Akbar ... is a common Arabic phrase shouted at various occasions. Which is true. Muslims don't just shout Allahu Akbar when they're killing people. The problem is that they do shout Allahu Akbar when they are killing people. And that shout reveals motive...."

From http://vladtepesblog.com/

Hat tip: Vlad Tepes blog

Oh, and here's Ben Shapiro: