Western Civilisation

Western Civilisation was and is superior to anything Islam has developed.  Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam

Recent Articles

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Western Multiculturalism - imitating the failed tolerance of the Meccan elite towards Islam.

Importing Moslems, tolerating a fascism, and lying about its 'peaceful' intent is plainly stupid.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

One of the greatest mistakes in modern history is not learning from the Meccans and their 'tolerance' of mad Muhammad's gibberish, now pronounced a 'religion'. Today some 50-65 million Moslems squat in Western lands, with at least 50% of those immigrants believing in Sharia Barbarism [it is not a Law], and fully aware [unlike most Westerners] that Islam is incompatible with Western ideals. The number of Moslems in Western states will reach 100 million in the next generation. Jihad, Sharia Barbarism, sex-slaving of young girls, necks smitten in city streets and another 9-11 are assured.


Witness the failure of the Meccans to kill Muhammad and do the world a favor.


Mimicking our own collective stupidity, one of the great mistakes in all of history, was the rather incomprehensible charity shown by the Meccans to the ruling tribe's mad poet, Muhammad. Sowing dissension, garbling Judaic-Christian scripture, insulting the Meccan pantheon, disrupting society, fomenting social discord should have earned the mad poet a parting of his head from his sloped shoulders. Instead, the Meccans threw the small cult of Muhammadans out of their city, and on to Medina, and eventual mastery of Arabia they went.


As the historian Gilchrist notes, the Hijra, or flight from Mecca to Medina, was part a preparation for Jihad. This was well understood during the time of Muhammad, and in the early centuries following his murder by fellow-Moslems. The Meccans would eventually see their city conquered by the mad poet at the head of 10.000 men, who smashed their idols, enshrined Arab paganism as divine, and ordered the Meccans to only follow Baal, the family deity of Muhammad, and the Lord or ilah of Mecca.


In the old Arab law, the Hijra did not merely signify rupture with his native town, but was equivalent to a sort of declaration of war against it. (Lammens, Islam: Beliefs and Institutions, p. 27)


We have already seen how closely related the Hijrah was to the active policy of jihad which immediately followed it and it comes as no surprise to find the inevitable conquest being pursued two years after the truce [between Muhammad and Mecca]. A small provocation by the Banu Bakr, a tribe allied to the Quraysh, on the Banu Khaza'ah, allied to Muhammad, was all he needed to declare the treaty broken. Abu Sufyan, aware that the balances were now tilted well in Muhammad's favour, went to Medina to restore the treaty but Muhammad refused to accommodate him and he returned to Mecca empty-handed.”


Muhammad out of self-interest of course, spared the population and the city from Jihadic destruction. As Mehmed II would say of his annihilation of Constantinople, he needed a capital, not a corpse. Interestingly, mad Muhammad butchered the Koranic verse scribe writer, who was charged with recording the frequent and quite convenient revelations from Baal to Muhammad. Apparently the scribe knew a fraud when he saw one, and being so close to the mad poet, understood perfectly well the nonsense that was Muhammad's 'prophecy':


[After Mecca was conquered] A dozen leading opponents were proscribed though only a few were eventually executed. Two were apostates from Islam, one was a poetess who had particularly irked Muhammad with her satires, and the last was one of two Meccans who had assaulted Muhammad's daughter Zaynab as she fled Mecca for Medina. The others escaped either by hiding themselves or by seeking pardon. One case is of particular interest.


One of these men was Abdullah ibn Abu al Sarh who once converted to Islam and wrote down the revelation for Muhammad, but who then apostatized, returned to Quraysh, and there spread tales about his falsification of the revelation. (Haykal, The Life of Muhammad, p. 410).”


If Muhammad was truly a 'messenger' why would his scribe apostasy and declaim against him?


In any event the madness of Western multi-culturalism, imitates that of the Mecan charity towards the nascent Islamic cult. Apparently that policy did not work out too well for the Meccans.



Monday, April 13, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Why the Crusades were necessary. No Islam, no Jihad, no necessity for the Crusades.

The theological fascism named Submission, caused the Crusades.

by Martin T. Horvat, Phd

Full Article

Modern history’s judgment on the Crusades has been severe and myopic, set as it is on portraying this glorious episode of Christian history as morally evil. When I praise the Middle Ages, I sometimes have young Catholics defiantly respond, “All right, all right. But how do you justify the Crusades?” Indoctrinated by revisionist history books and inter-religious study courses, they have accepted the false verdict that the Crusades were nothing more than a condemnable act of intolerance in the name of God. 


Further, many of these youth have been adversely influenced by innumerable apologies for the Crusades from so many high-placed Catholic Prelates, religious, and educators of the post-Vatican II progressivist Church. Let me give only a few examples: 


* During a visit to Syria this year (2001), Pope John Paul II himself visited a mosque and asked forgiveness of the Muslims “for Christian offenses and violence of the past” (1) 


* On July 15, 1999, the 900th anniversary of the fall of Jerusalem to the Crusaders, a party of Christians, claiming to be acting in the name of Christ and as supposed descendents of Crusaders, paraded round the wall of the Old City to publicize a personal apology to Muslims for the Crusades (2). 


This small incident says a lot: A new Catholic high school in San Juan Capistrano (CA) chose the team name Crusaders, only to have the name vetoed by the board because “it would be offensive to Muslims, who were targets of the bloody crusades of the Middle Ages “ (3).


To accept blame when one is at fault is, or course, good. But in the above cases, the apologizers and reconciliators only show that they have misinterpreted history.


First, they do not understand what motivated the West to a just war: The Crusades were waged to recover the Holy Sepulchre, which had become the target of constant profanation by the Muslims, for the defense of Christian pilgrims, and for the recovery of Christian territory. They constituted a defensive reaction against the Islamic threat. 

Second, they do not understand the aggressive nature and fanaticism of Islam (founded by Mohammed, who lived from about 570 to 632 AD), which had been in conflict with Christianity since the Muslim conquests of the 7th century, and had as its goal the imposition of its religion and Mohammedan law on all Europe.


Pope is mosque in Damascus.jpg - 30562 Bytes


May 6, 2001  -  In the mosque in Damascus JPII greets the mufti and asks forgiveness for the past


The anger, frustration and fear roused in all Americans at the September 11 attack on the East Coast provide an opportunity to make the Crusades more comprehensible. There are surprising parallels between the two events. Both then and now, there were:


1. the peril of losing valuable religious principles, such as freedom of worship; 

2. a perceived physical threat to fellow countrymen; 

3. the injury experienced at losing a landmark site; 

4. the sense that what is at stake is nothing less than the survival of Western civilization.


Those who rant and rave against the Crusades may soon find the ground shifting beneath them as they share in a new consensus, which, at base, is not so different from that which supported the medieval religious war they are condemning. Today’s call for a war on moral grounds is not so different from that of the Pope who called on Christians throughout Europe to come to the defense of Christendom “out of love of God and their neighbor” (4).

4. Jonathan Riley-Smith, What were the Crusades? (London, 1977), pp. 13-14.


A threat to fellow Christians 

Since the third century, a favorite site of pilgrimage for Christians was the Holy Land. When Islam burst out of Arabia and took control of the Middle East in the seventh century, pilgrimages to the Holy Land became more difficult, but never ceased. 


But the great age of pilgrimage began with the 10th century. In Palestine, the most beloved site of pilgrimage, the lot of the Christians was no longer so bad, and men and women of every class and age, sometimes travelling in parties numbering thousands, journeyed by sea or the land route to visit “the Sepulchre of the Lord which is in Jerusalem.” The Fatimid Arabs who were governing Palestine were lenient, trade was prospering, and pilgrims were welcomed for the wealth they brought to the province. 


This period of relative peace came to an abrupt halt at the end of the 10th century. The Arabs were displaced as governors of the holy places by the Seljuk Turks, who reinvigorated the dwindling military spirit of Islam, and again made the call for jihad, or holy war. Their aim was the same as it has been since the inception of Islam, which does not mean “peace,” despite the strange and insistent claims of this seen in the newspapers today. 


In fact, the word Islam means submission, and not just a passive submission to the book of Islam, the Koran. Submission for the followers of Mohammed means to carry out the will of Allah in history. The Muslim doctrine of the jihad, or holy war, stemmed from the ideas of the prophet himself—that is, that it was Allah’s will for a permanent war to reign until the rule of Islam extended over all the world. Hence Islam’s political domination could be, and was, spread by the sword. This is why Hillaire Belloc predicted almost a century ago that the West could again see a threat from Islam: 


It very nearly destroyed us. It kept up the battle against Christendom actively for a thousand years, and the story is by no means over; the power of Islam may at any moment re-arise” (5).

5. Hillaire Belloc, The Great Heresies, Chapter Four


Site link where this was published by Martin T. Horvat, Phd. 

Friday, April 10, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Another Moslem-Enlightenment lie; 'Christians never bathed'.....

No end to the ridiculous nonsense about the Middle Ages.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

One has to be fearfully uneducated to believe propaganda without casting a rational doubting eye upon the claim and claimant. 'Enlightenment' philosophes pious in their Atheism or Protestant belief systems, looking upon 500 year old Cathedrals and pronouncing them 'Gothic', a pejorative for barbaric – are hardly the bien pensants that one should listen to or believe. Their ignorance is not 'science' or 'fact'. The great structures of worship which beguile and beckon tourists today can hardly be the outputs of a 'dark age', as mythical and as ridiculously inane as that term is. An age which invented everything imaginable from books to eye-glasses, and blast furnaces to massive grinding mills was not dark.


Witness bathing. The big brains say that the Medieval Christian, toothless, wearing sackcloth, with long shaggy hair, never knew a bath, and when they did, they ran from water as a cat runs from a dog. This is an oft-repeated Moslem lie, as if Islam has invented anything other than Jihad, sex slaving and death. Bathing was common in Roman Europe and that tradition was certainly embedded in the superior culture which followed the non-existent 'fall of Rome'. [Rome was dead long before 476 AD.] Bathing was known, common and at times, a community event in Medieval Europe [which brought its own problems of lack of privacy and even prostitution].


Bathing and bouquets
Marian Horvat, Phd. "The next time you are washing your hands and complain because the water temperature isn't just how you like it, think about how things used to be. Here are some facts about the 1500's:
Most people got married in June, because they took their yearly bath in May and still smelled pretty good by June. However, they were starting to smell, so brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting married.

15th century midwife attending a birth


15th century illustration of a midwife attending a birth. The baby is washed in a fresh water basin immediately after birth.

These are not facts, but falsehoods. 

Many people married in May or June because they were Catholics and the Church wisely proscribed marriages from being celebrated during the Lenten season, a time of abstinence and penance. By the way, this pious law continued to be followed by good Catholics until Vatican II swept out so many of the good traditions that developed in the Age of Faith. 

As for the yearly-bath myth, medievalists have long laid to rest the idea that people rarely bathed in the Middle Ages. The Middle Ages was a period of hygiene and cleanliness. The first bit of evidence we have is the prevalence of soap, a common product used for washing clothes and washing people. Next, there are multiple references in literature and manuscripts to bathing, treated matter-of-factly, as something common place. Charlemagne, for example, used to bathe each morning in a large pool or river, where he would meet with his ministers, who were also invited to bathe. 

Bathing was part of a ritual before certain ceremonies, such as knighthood, and in the romances of chivalry we see that the laws of hospitality required offering guests a bath before they dined.

14th century thermal bath houses

14th century thermal bath houses

Scenes from 14th century thermal baths houses, popular at the time. The establishments were served by river currents 

The first etiquette manuals (13th century), as well as the various monastic Rules, specified washing the hands before eating, and keeping the hair, fingernails and clothing clean. Clearly, washing was frequent – there is evidence all over the place for people washing their hands, faces and feet on a daily basis. 

Monastic rules usually had previsions that stipulated washing one’s hair and bathing once each week, usually on a certain day. We can also see how the medievals utilized running rivers or streams. The monks of Cluny were the first to take advantage of the nearby running stream to use as a type of indoor plumbing system. One can still find there numerous lavatories close to the refectories. 

A saying in France from those days shows how cleanliness was considered one of the pleasures of existence:

Venari, ludere, lavari, bibere; Hoc est vivere!
(To hunt, to play, to wash, to drink, - This is to live!)

One thing I might add, care should be taken not to attribute to the 13th century the revolting uncleanliness of the 16th and subsequent centuries which, in France at least, has continued up to our own time. 

As for the bridal bouquet, it was one of numerous beautiful symbolic customs that developed around the Sacrament of Matrimony that we have inherited. For the medieval mind, which saw in all nature a reflection of the Creator, each flower had a symbolic value and displayed a message. 

Orange blossom, popular for bridal bouquets, denoted chastity, purity and loveliness. A sprig of ivy was included in bouquets as a symbol of fidelity. Roses represented love, and the lily of the valley, happiness, and so on. The flowers of the bridal bouquet had real meaning; they were not meant to disguise foul odors from a supposedly unwashed bride and groom."


Thursday, April 09, 2015

Bookmark and Share

ISIS will implode like all failed Fascisms

Mein Islam leads to nothing but destruction.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article


ISIS is just following the 1500+ verses of Kufar-hate in Mein Koran. Dominate, tax, control, slaughter, rape....all is justified for Baal the iLah of Mecca, or the moon god of Muhammad. In Mein Koran of course Muhammad is often-times conflated with, and confused with, the iLah or Lord. But, as with other communal fascisms such as National Socialism, or Communism, the annihilation of the individual, of rights, freedoms, free-speech, and religion all leads to the same penury, destruction and eradication of civilization. ISIS territory looks more like 1980 Moscow than a 'liberated' Moslem state.







[lines for food, consumer items...]

Doesn't anyone wonder why the Moslem world is such a mess ? 50% of marriages are 2nd or first cousins. Inbreeding does not lead to genetic improvement. Over half of females are illiterate. Little in the way of innovation or advancement can be traced back to Islam current or past. The modern Islamic world is a mess, why would the medieval Moslem world be any better ? Culture is King, and when your culture is shaped by the fascistic barbarity of Mein Koran under the leadership of Mein Muhammad, it stands to reason that you will create nothing but an impoverished, illiterate mess.


According to the document, Islamic State is enforcing the gruesome rules as it wants the population to fear God, in order for them to “enter into His mercy”. Earlier this year the UN reported that children are not exempt from IS’s torturous regime, but have been crucified or buried alive alongside adults when found guilty of crimes including refusal to convert to Islam. Young people with mental disabilities have been used as suicide bombers or as human shields during battle.” Link


Only the brain dead don't see Islam for what it really is.



Tuesday, April 07, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Christian science to Einstein and Nuclear energy

Maxwell would not be 'suitable' for academia today. Neither would Eistein.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

From Maxwell to Einstein. There is no corollary within Islam of course, though I am sure Phds are being minted confirming that Maxwell received all of his input and inspiration from some non-existent Moslem science during the Golden Age. Indeed electro-magnetic theory was no doubt discovered in the mythical Cordoba of the 9th century....


In the modern pagan cults which dominate society – Islam is civilization, warming, the earth mother, atheism, fish-to-men, relativity, exploding everything from nothing – a serious appreciation for life, grace, beauty and existence is given short shrift. The so-called 'Enlightenment' disparaged a thousand years of European progress, belittling the Catholic society that somehow survived the Moslem Jihad, the Vikings, Magyars and Avars, various plagues, famines and 'climate change', not to mention creating modern science, math, medicine, architecture and universities. Books so beloved by the smug 'intellectual', were a medieval creation.


In the modern age we take nuclear power – for good and bad – as a given. Yet it was only developed in the West. It is rather easy for anyone with enough initiative to trace out the direct line from medieval science, the 13th century to the 19th century, and the Christian scientist Maxwell, who provided the key insight which led to our usage of safe nuclear power. I don't see a Moslem lineage or equivalent technological development.


In 1864 Maxwell gave a presentation to the Royal Society of London titled: 'A Dynamic Theory of the Electro-Magnetic Field'. He stated: 


We have strong reason to conclude that light itself - including radiant heat and other radiation, if any - is an electromagnetic disturbance in the form of waves propagated through the electro-magnetic field according to electro-magnetic laws.”

Historian of science one Professor R V Jones made the observation that: “This paper is the first pointer to the existence of radiation other than light and heat, and ranks as one of the greatest leaps ever achieved in human thought.”


Maxwell did not have a Phd. He was Christian. According to the cults of science today, this would mean that nothing he said or did would be 'scientific'. He would not be allowed an academic post in today's university system of cultish belief and group think.


By calculating the speed of electromagnetic waves, Maxwell postulated that light is a form of electromagnetic radiation exerting pressure and carrying momentum. This is a crucial insight and as Jones states, one of the most germane in the entire history of human thought. Maxwell's experiential data provided the basis for Einstein's work on relativity from which the relationship between energy, mass and velocity contributed to the theory underlying the development of atomic energy. Einstein was another scientist sans a Phd, a deist [though not a believer in the Christian ideal of God]; and today would not be qualified to teach in a university because he would not garner enough grant money. Such is the reduction of science in its purity and purpose.



Monday, April 06, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Pierre Duham and the importance of Middle Age Science.

Without the Middle Ages the 'Scientific revolution' does not exist.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

And then he saw the light....Pierre Duhem (1861–1916) was a French physicist and historian of science. Before 1904 this famous scientists was quite certain that all of chemistry and physics, including mechanics, electricity, and magnetism, could be understood from thermodynamic first principles [law of matter and energy]. In this regard, saturated in the 'Enlightenment' and Atheist propaganda that no science was known before Voltaire, he regarded the Middle Ages as bereft of scientific advancement. Like many others who actually decided to study the subject he proved himself utterly wrong.


Duhem converted to the common-sense idea of what some call, 'continuity' and incremental change in scientific understanding. It was not dark for 1000 years, and then presto! the light shone and Galileo an earnest Catholic appeared. Copernicus and Newton both stated that they owed their achievements to the insights and labor of others. Some 500 medieval scientists in all manner of disciplines could be named.


It was Duhem who began to bring light and understanding to the subject of medieval science. In 1904, he found an unusual reference to a then-unknown medieval thinker, Jordanus de Nemore (d. 1260). From this small beginning Duhem invented the history of medieval science. Where Duhem's previous histories had been silent or negative about pre-1600 science in the Middle Ages, Les origines de la statique contained a number of chapters on the subject with one considering the impact of Jordanus de Nemore; another his followers; and a third argued about their influence on Leonardo de Vinci.


In his second volume of the same name, Duhem greatly extended his historical scope returning to the middle ages, spending four chapters on geostatics, including the work of Albert of Saxony in the fourteenth century. This investigation formed the basis of Duhem's best book on the subject of Middle Age science, Etudes sur Léonard de Vinci, and Le Système du monde, in which his thesis of the continuity of late medieval and early modern science is illustrated and quite proven.


From 1906 to 1913, Duhem studied the scientific notebooks of Leonardo de Vinci and published a series of essays uncovering de Vinci's medieval sources and their influences on the moderns. This was an important link in the continuity thesis. Da Vinci and his 'Renaissance' contemporaries were undoubtedly part of the Middle Ages and owed a great deal to what preceded them. Common sense would confirm this. In Etudes sur Léonard de Vinci Duhem's proposed the obvious and correct impression that Galileo's efforts were all preceded by a medieval heritage:

When we see the science of Galileo triumph over the stubborn Peripatetic philosophy of somebody like Cremonini, we believe, since we are ill-informed about the history of human thought, that we are witness to the victory of modern, young science over medieval philosophy, so obstinate in its mechanical repetition. In truth, we are contemplating the well-paved triumph of the science born at Paris during the fourteenth century over the doctrines of Aristotle and Averroes, restored into repute by the Italian Renaissance. (1917, 162; 1996, 193.)

Duhem presented Galilean dynamics as a continuous development out of medieval dynamics. We know of course, that this is entirely true, yet in the early 20th century it was a heresy. He recovered the late medieval theory of impetus, tracing it from John Philoponus' criticism of Aristotle, to its maturity in the fourteenth century works of John Buridan and Nicole Oresme:

The role that impetus played in Buridan's dynamics is exactly the one that Galileo attributed to impeto or momento, Descartes to ‘quantity of motion,’ and Leibniz finally to vis viva. So exact is this correspondence that, in order to exhibit Galileo's dynamics, Torricelli, in his Lezioni accademiche, often took up Buridan's reasons and almost his exact words” (1917, 163–62; 1996, 194).”


Duhem then sketched the extension of impetus theory from terrestrial dynamics to the motions of the heavens and earth. No one since the Christian era began had ever believed in a flat earth, and many Middle Age scientists were convinced that the earth was not the center of the universe. Gravity was known long before Galileo:


Nicole Oresme attributed to the earth a natural impetus similar to the one Buridan attributed to the celestial orbs. In order to account for the vertical fall of weights, he allowed that one must compose this impetus by which the mobile rotates around the earth with the impetus engendered by weight. The principle he distinctly formulated was only obscurely indicated by Copernicus and merely repeated by Giordano Bruno. Galileo used geometry to derive the consequences of that principle, but without correcting the incorrect form of the law of inertia implied in it. (1917, 166; 1996, 196.)”


Duhem went further and linked Albert of Saxony [from the 14th century] whose works were printed and reprinted during the sixteenth century, to Galileo. Duhem's key to understanding the transmission of medieval science was Galileo's use of the phrase Doctores Parisienses, which indicated the Parisian scholars Buridan and Oresme, amongst others. Duhem had rightly conjectured that Galileo had used George Lokert's biography of Albert of Saxony, along with the works of the Dominican Domingo de Soto (1906–13, III.582–83). Duhem's thesis, then original, has been confirmed through the studies of A. C. Crombie, Adriano Carugo, and William Wallace.


Duhem, when confronted with the evidence, apostasied, changed his mind and provided important proof that the Middle Ages certainly built and informed the era of modern science.  



Thursday, April 02, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Modern science arose only in Christian Europe.

Atheism has little to offer real science.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

We are told that there was a 'revolution' in the 17th century in science. The implication is that science, or our modern understanding of it, just suddenly popped up, rising out of the mud and superstition of a 'dark age'. This sounds more like propaganda and claptrap than a real history of science. Most 'breakthroughs' are built on the careful accumulation of change and experimentation. Most 'revolutions' are firmly rooted in past events and precursors. Very little erupts at once, caused by a singular combination of events and energy. It stands to reason, as two of the more famous Christian scientists one could name out of 200 Newton and Copernicus admitted, that great insights stand on the shoulders of those who have laboured before.



Atheist-marxist-positivist histories of science either ignore or denigrate the achievements of medieval natural philosophers and scientists. These types studiously ignore the creation of algebra [Diophantus 2nd c AD], physics, calculation of the earth's sphericity, motion theorems, mean speed theorems, advanced geometry [see Descartes], objective experimentation [11th century], the University system [11th c or earlier], engineering [Gothic cathedrals], and the hundreds of inventions from optics [glasses, 13th c], to modern pants, to water milling wheels and the blast furnace. It seems rather odd that modern atheist academics wearing glasses, pants and reading books, would be so inclined to hate the medieval period.



A key objection that 'Enlightenment thinkers' had against the Christian Medieval period was its supposed faith in Aristotle. This is simply untrue [see here]. There were major groups within Christendom that either totally or partially rejected Aristotleian theorem in the natural sciences [Augustine, Siger et al]. Most of Aristotle is utterly wrong and medieval man knew this. His philosophical writings were in the main more compatible with the Christian view and since Aristotle represented the thought of the ancient world, it seems only fitting and rational that the Christian era would attempt to both understand and reconcile ancient Greek philosophy with medieval science. The supposedly rational 'Enlightenment' did not understand this, and such a fact only highlights its bigotry.



Apparently the 'Enlightenment' did not know that Aristotle's writings were condemned in 1277 as being contrary to scripture and observable evidence [Aristotle believed in many phenomena which were simply disproved by science]. The famed history of science philosopher Pierre Duhem, who in the early 20th century pioneered the investigation into medieval science, believed these condemnations of 1277 implied the rejection of the idea that the universe had to be the way Aristotle thought it had to, and the birth of the realisation that the workings of the universe had to be empirically determined. In other words they were a step forward for science. We see this evidenced in the neo-Platonism of Copernicus and Kepler – again in opposition to Aristotle - had developed in Italy through the late Middle Ages while the insistence on an intelligible and rational universe is found throughout scholastic natural philosophy, embedded within an independent University system.



Historian James Hannam, himself not that sympathetic to the Catholic Medieval viewpoint admits that science, in whatever method it arrived [a sudden leap, or a slow transformation], did present itself only in Christian Europe. Surely this must confound the modern Marxist and Atheist:

Despite the huge volume of modern scholarship on the scientific revolution, there is no agreed answer to the question of why it happened in Western Europe in the seventeenth century and not elsewhere or earlier. Some theories include: sociologist Robert Merton’s suggestion of Puritanism provided the conditions for science, Thomas Kuhn’s system of normal science and revolution, Frances Yates claiming credit for hermetic magic, Duhem and Stanley Jaki for Catholic theology and Lynn White’s contention that the driving force was provided by technological change. No single theory has proved entirely satisfactory or convincing, as they tend to look either at internal or external causes rather than a combination. For the external environment, the medieval contribution might have come from the institution of the university, the reception of Greek and Arabic thought and the worldview of a rational creator God. Internal to medieval science, there is the work of developing, criticising and discarding hypotheses begun by scholastic natural philosophers and still ongoing.”


The only theory that makes sense when describing the rise of European science is cultural. Culture is king and only in Christian Europe did modern science, medicine and mathematics arise.  

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Mein Koran, Mein Kampf, lots of violence in Sura 2

Islam is peace you say? Can you read ?

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

Sura 2 in which 15 % of the text preaches violence against Kufar untermensch can be summarized by 2:216:


216: Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.


2:216 precedes the supposedly tolerant verse of 2:256 in which Muhammad pleads for the safety of his pathetically small group of malcontents, by invoking 'you believe in your god, I will believe in mine'. This was in Mecca during the 'mad poet days' of Muhammad when he was mocked, scorned and eventually cast out as a trouble making lunatic, who disrupted society, trade and peaceful worship at the Kabaa or shrine. 2:256 is of course followed immediately by threats, Jihad, punishment and violence. In other words, you have your religion and I have mine – and mine is superior and will conquer yours.


257. Allah is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons are the Evil Ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be Companions of the fire, to dwell therein (forever).


*In other words, there is no compulsion in religion because those who do not follow Allah are going to be consumed in the Fire reserved for the ones who follow Evil. In other words eternal damnation. 


2:257 is certainly emblematic of Koranic fascism. There are 286 verses in this chapter and fully 15% or 44 verses discuss violence, hatred and war against non-Moslems. This is surely a rather immoderate amount. This chapter mimicks the Koran at large, with its usage of words to dehumanize Christian, Jews and Pagans including such niceties as mushrikun, zalimun, fasiqun, mufsidun, and musrifun; or in plain english; criminal, unclean, hypocrites, evil, wrong-doers, satanic and other appellations to cleave the world into 2 camps. The good people of this world are with Muhammad [or the ilah or 'one' which is the same as Muhammad]. The bad people are the criminals, the polytheists, the Jews, the Christians [who are deemed to be satanic polytheists]; and those who reject the Allah cult. It is much easier ot kill Jews and Christians if they are sub-human.


War against them: 9 verses

190: And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors.


Note: This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihad, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)]. 'Transgress' is hard to delineate since if you keep reading below there seems to be very few 'limits' to fighting and killing the Unbeliever.....


191: And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [or disbelief in Muhammad and Allah] is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.


193: And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)


216: Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.


217: They ask you concerning fighting in the Sacred Months (i.e. 1st, 7th, 11th and 12th months of the Islamic calendar). Say, "Fighting therein is a great (transgression) but a greater (transgression) with Allah is to prevent mankind from following the Way of Allah, to disbelieve in Him, to prevent access to Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah), and to drive out its inhabitants, and Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And they will never cease fighting you until they turn you back from your religion (Islamic Monotheism) if they can. And whosoever of you turns back from his religion and dies as a disbeliever, then his deeds will be lost in this life and in the Hereafter, and they will be the dwellers of the Fire. They will abide therein forever."


218: Verily, those who have believed, and those who have emigrated (for Allah's Religion) and have striven hard in the Way of Allah, all these hope for Allah's Mercy. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most-Merciful.


244: And fight in the Way of Allah and know that Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.


246: Have you not thought about the group of the Children of Israel after (the time of) Musa (Moses)? When they said to a Prophet of theirs, "Appoint for us a king and we will fight in Allah's Way." He said, "Would you then refrain from fighting, if fighting was prescribed for you?" They said, "Why should we not fight in Allah's Way while we have been driven out of our homes and our children (families have been taken as captives)?" But when fighting was ordered for them, they turned away, all except a few of them. And Allah is All-Aware of the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers).


Note: This might reference self-defence, but the main point is that when Allah tells you to fight, you must, and if you make excuses or 'turn away', you are a Zalimun or wrong-doer.


249: Then when Talut (Saul) set out with the army, he said: "Verily! Allah will try you by a river. So whoever drinks thereof, he is not of me, and whoever tastes it not, he is of me, except him who takes (thereof) in the hollow of his hand." Yet, they drank thereof, all, except a few of them. So when he had crossed it (the river), he and those who believed with him, they said: "We have no power this day against Jalut (Goliath) and his hosts." But those who knew with certainty that they were to meet their Lord, said: "How often a small group overcame a mighty host by Allah's Leave?" And Allah is with As-Sabirin (the patient ones, etc.).


Note: Allah will support those who fight on his behalf no matter how weak they might appear to be versus their enemies. The above verse pillages the story of David and Goliath to link the Muhammadan struggle with a battle between the ancient Hebrews and Philistines some 1650 years earlier.


Clear enough? Or do we need Phds to reinterpret 'the data' for us, and use Orwellian illogicality to claim that war is peace, Jihad is friendship, fighting is hugging. Islam is a cult dedicated to Jihad and dominating if not killing non-Moslems in the name of the Allah-thing.



Sunday, March 29, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Allah is Baal or Satan, as the cult of Islam's practices and rituals make clear

Worshiping a moon idol ? Maybe acquire some intelligence and leave the cult.

by Ferdinand III

Full Article

The evidence that Allah or 'the Lord', was a moon deity is rather overwhelming. The crescent moon adorns every mosque and flag of Islam. The moon deity Hu'Baal was the chief Lord of Mecca, and Baal is another name for the Babylonian Sin or moon god. Plenty of factual information about Islam's moon god is found here.


To wit: The worship of the moon and its various phases is a well-known historical fact. Hub'Al or Hub Allah, or Hu' Baal, is simply the moon god of Mecca. Baal was another name of the Babylonian moon deity Sin. Baal is often mentioned in the Bible and is linked to evil, including sexual depravity, child sacrifice, bull-worship, polygamy and tyranny.




Moslems are not good with evidence, reality or truth. Muhammad's family were the caretakers of the Baal shrine, and Baal was the Lord or ilah of Mecca, the main idol out of the 360 worshipped by the Meccans. He had a consort [sex slave] named Allat the Sun Goddes and two daughters, Uzza and Manat [Venus and the Moon]. The worship of constellation bodies was a common Near Eastern practice.


Prof. Potts pointed out, “Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites.” In ancient Syria and Canna, the Moon-god Sin was usually represented by the moon in its crescent phase. (Full Article)


The Symbol, the crescent moon, is very important here because Muslim scholars argue that the presence of the Moon God in Arabia proves nothing. Sure - they say, there was Hubal in Mecca and this deity was worshipped there together with other 360+ gods. This is why Muhammad got rid of all these idols and converted all the Arab tribes into the only and true religion - Islam.

There are however strong arguments against this interpretation.

If it is true that Muhammad abandoned all ancient Quraish deities and Hubal - the most powerful one, why is it that many Islamic rites and customs are the same as the old pagan ones?


The pagan rituals of pre-Muhammadan Arabia were simply codified as 'divinely' inspired by Muhammad. This was the political compromise effected by Muhammad to allow the former pagan Meccans the belief, that they were still worshipping in the same manner as their ancestors.


Muhammad to the Meccans: “Keep your rituals, your rites and even your private beliefs he told them; but only worship the one Allah as the Lord of Lords, the only deity of divine inspiration. And remember most importantly, I am his spokesman, interpreter and only agent on earth. As well, by doing so I will not have my brigands cut off your heads. Oh, and by the way, pay that Zakat tax to the centralizing state power. We need that to fund the Umma, Jihad and public projects.”


Baal is allied with Satan in the Old Testament. When viewing the cult of Islam, its Jihad, its murder, its endless war, its sex trading, its polygamy and sex obsession, its pedophilia, its intolerance, and its hate, it is not hard to see why this association is valid.  

Links:




Reform the cult of Islam and Islamic States
Click on the Banner below to help Persecuted Christians, violently attacked, raped and killed by Moslems, in Moslem dominated countries and regions:

Islam is a cult, not a religion.  Its genesis is the political-theocratic orders of the Bronze and Iron ages.  The doctrines of 'Submission' are barbaric, immoral, irrational and pagan, not to mention fascistic in the real sense of that abused term.  

Islam  never has produced even a tithe of the  innovations, inventions, tools, and  breakthroughs in the realms of art, writing, philosophy, politcal- economy, science, medicine, governance,  social welfare, justice, law and  free-will rationality, as wrought by the Middle  Ages in European Christendom.   

The Fascist theology of Muhammadanism.

Paxton's definition of Fascism boils down to a few essentials:
  1. Fascism is a political project which is formed to reverse a perceived decline. [Islam – check]
  2. It is violent and bloody. [Islam - check]
  3. It is a cult, in which the cult must be obeyed by all who are ruled by the cult. [Islam - check]
  4. The cult employs myths of purity and greatness, of the race, or state in question. [Islam - check]
  5. Ideals around rationality, democracy, individualism, and freedom need to be abandoned. [Islam - check]
  6. Following the plan and diktats of the cult are the individual's only responsibilities. [Islam - check]

Paxton's identification of Fascism as a mass movement, premised on some absurd idea of 'purity' and on violence, is certainly correct. It is indeed the cult uber alles. One can go further of course in refining what is a Fascist movement.  In a 1995 essay titled "Eternal Fascism",  [link] the Italian writer and academic Umberto Eco adopts a detailed list of Fascist ideological components. For Eco, Fascism is not a coherent political program per-se, but a set of organizing principles specific to the culture in question: He lists 14 main features of the Fascist program...... more

Mock Islam daily and often.  An intolerant pagan-fascist cult deserves no respect.

Muhammad cartoons.  If Muhammad was a 'prophet' so too was Adolf and Josef.  All of the French cartoons are here
Muhammad's favorite wife - Aisha.  6 year old girl married to a 53 year old 'man'......clever.  Younger than his own daughter.  Moslems deny this.  But sadly for them, the Koran, the Hadiths and Moslem historiography confirm that Muhammad married a mere child and consummated it when she was 9.



Muhammad in the full glare of history.  Why won't Moslems inquire about who this man really was ? Terrified of the Truth ?

Fitna and the Moslem imperative to fight all Unbelievers until the entire world is free of the Infidel.

Where did this cult named Submission or  Islam come from ?

Arab Historian and Moslem-apologist Hitti detailing the moon deity of Mecca, Hub'Allah as the Al-Lah of the Koran.


"Philip Hitti was an Arab historian, whose opus 'History of the Arabs' originally created in 1937, is without much doubt the most important, and most deeply flawed work on the history of the Arabs and by consequence Islam. A summary review of his work is posted here. The main strength of Hitti's book is his pre-Islamic history which is a fascinatingly detailed look at pre-Muhammad Arabia......


Celestial worship
On page 60 Hitti describes the sky pantheon which infected Arabian pagan beliefs:
“The religion of South Arabia was in its essence a planetary astral system in which the cult of the moon-god prevailed. The moon, known in Hadramawt as Sin, to the Minaeans as Wadd (love or lover, father), to the Sabaeans as Almaqah (the health-giving god?)....He was conceived of as a masculine deity and took precedence over the sun, Shams, who was his consort.....From this celestial pair sprang the many other heavenly bodies considered divine. The North Arabian al-Lat, who figured in the Koran, may have been another name for the sun-goddess.” [p.60]

Baal
Baal was the Sky God or Thunder God of various Near Eastern pre-Christian era tribes. The Hittites and Canaanites worshipped the power of the Thunder God. The Assyrians and Sumerians the omnipotence of the Sky God. Baal or Hubal would be akin to Thor in Nordic legend, or Zeus and Jupiter in ancient Greece or Rome. It is not a surprise that Baal was also worshipped in pre-Muhammad Arabia:
“Ba'l represented the spirit of springs and underground water and must have been introduced into Arabia at the same time as the palm tree....The Bedouin's astral beliefs centered upon the moon, in whose light he grazed his flocks. Moon-worship implies a pastoral society, whereas sun-worship represents a later agricultural stage....Hence Wadd (Koran 71:22), the moon-good who stood at the head of Minaean pantheon....Al-Lat in al-Taif was represented by a square stone...” [p. 97]
Baal is of course quite dissimilar to the Christian ideals of 'god' though he did have a human form – much like Zeus.
“Hubal (from Aramaic for vapour, spirit), evidently the chief deity of al-Kabah, was represented in human form....The pagan Kabah, which became the palladium of Islam, was an unpretentious cube-like (hence the name) building of primitive simplicity....serving as a shelter for a black meteorite which was venerated as a fetish.” [p. 100] More

Why Islam is a cult

A cult is not a religion. A religion to be worthy of the name, must support the following 4 ideals; free-will; rationality (or faith through reason); the Golden Rule; and good works towards any and all. We cannot forget that Calvin`s cult in 16 century Geneva denied free will and enquiry. The peasants simply had to shut up and obey the militant cult. Lutheranism embraced pre-destination and denounced human free-will, goodness, and works of faith. Luther created Calvin. Modern secularism, so hateful of Judeo-Christianity, worships material dialecticism and scientism, no matter how perverted, irrational or distorted the scientism might be. Free will and rational skepticism – at least for the hoi polloi peasantry – is beyond the pale in a world worshipping the cult of science and abstract, obtruse and often times utterly vapid materialist-narcissist philosophies.

Cults do not possess nor desire golden means. They are erected as extremist ideals bent on the subversion of reality and individuality. We ridicule ourselves and our common-sense by ascribing the word religion to the cult of Muhammad.

Muhammad

If you read the history of Mohammed and the formation of his cult, two obvious observations come to mind. First Islam is based on a moon cult, suffused with some Judaic notions of monotheism [see here for why Islam is a moon cult]. Second, the racism, supremacism, violence, calls to war, the innumerable campaigns, the pilfering and rape of caravans and towns, and the code of obedience, all foreshadow Nazism and the modern pagan cults embodied in the leaderships of Hitler, Mussolini, Lenin and Stalin. 

Since no-one in the educational or media establishments bothers to read about Mohammed, these uncomfortable truths – the war, the hate, the bile, the carnage, the injunction to conquer the world – are quietly untold. But that is the real historical Mohammed. He was not a great man, as Time Magazine ejaculated when assigning status to the most important individuals in history. Mohammed was a monster, a man who created a cult, which as Churchill remarked, inculcated in its votaries a primitive, and ruthless passion – the scourge of civilisation. 

Books Reviewed

Robert R. Reilly, 'The Closing of the Muslim Mind'. The Mutazilite doctrine of church and state separation and the necessity to use reason to find faith, flowered for only 50 years. The Islamic counter-reformation was harsh and uncompromising. The three main schools of Islamic theology grouped as Asharism [after an important 9  century Sunni teacher]; and a fourth named Hanbalism [named after Hanbali an immoderate and extremist fundamentalist of the 8 century]; took over:

"In the second year of the reign of Caliph Ja'afar al-Mutawakkil (847-861), the tables were turned....Holding Mutazilite doctrine became a crime punishable by death. The Mutazilites were expelled from court...and their works largely destroyed....the long process of dehellenization and ossification had begun."

It took the Asharites some 200 years to expunge Mutazilitism from Islam. Some Mutazilite philosophers still appeared in the 10th and 11th century in the forms of Alfarabi, Avicenna, and Averroes. But they were weak and without followers in a Muslim world quickly cementing Asharite and Hanbalist fundamentalism into every aspect of Islamic life. Free will was destroyed. Rationality mocked.

Child Abuse

Child sex is common in the Islamic world. It comes from imitating the rape by Mohammed of Aysha – a mere 9 year old innocent. For Muslims, Mohammed is the ultimate symbol of male greatness. Ergo sex with children is not only permitted but practised. Mass marriages of 13 year old child-brides are common in Gaza, Lebanon and elsewhere. A 13 year old girl in Muslim culture is ready to produce Muslim male offspring – under the guidance of an older male Muslim of course.

"According to western standards, or any civilized standard, Mohammed’s marriage to Aysha and having sex with her at the age of nine years is a crime called paedophilia.  However, Muslims call it an ordinary marriage and justify it on the supposition that girls in hot countries tend to reach sexual maturity faster than in cold countries. Muslims assume, without any evidence, that  Aysha had a menstruation before her marriage and conclude that Mohammed had sex with an adult aged nine years!  This justification by Muslims is an indication of how they understand maturity; simply it is sexual maturity and has nothing to do with the mind."

Conflicts in Islam

Jew-hate is racism.
As simple as that. This racist inclination infects the Arab-Muslim and UN world. The extent of this immorality is so pervasive that most Westerners accept the myth that Gazan Arabs are somehow `Palestinians` - a word created in the 1960s by Arafat and the fascist PLO. Palestinian Arabia is a myth designed to create an aura of historical legitimacy for a group of people who don't have any. It is the Arabs of course who are squatting on territory which was a part of the ancient Jewish kingdoms, which predate the Muslim invasions by some 1700 years. Yet most Arabs and Muslims know nothing about Islamic, Arab or Jewish history. One third to one-half of the Arab world is illiterate. No wonder the Meccan moon cult fascism is so highly prized

Crusades

The Crusades were one of the most important events in our history – and one of the most glorious. They saved civilisation. There is little doubt about this. As another writerstates so correctly:

"So I'll say for the record that despite the excesses that took place as they were waged, the Crusades were a great moment in Christian history—as the Church has recognized by canonizing so many Crusaders (King Louis IX and Bernard of Clairvaux are two well-known examples), and the current cringing surrender many urge before Islam is a sickening, un-Christian scandal—on the order of the suicidally stupid Children's Crusade. Any religion that will not fight in its own defense deserves to be persecuted—and there are plenty abroad in the Muslim world who will happily oblige it."

Islam or Mohammedanism as it should be called [or the cult of Mohammed], is a militant barbarous paganism. Why wouldn't you fight it?

Democracy

Weimar Germany fell to the Nazi's due to many reasons, including economic stagnation; extreme nationalism; a victim narrative; apathy and ruthless, terrorist tactics. The singular innovation of the Nazi party was to attack its enemies using the ferocious 'brownshirts' or terrorist milita, whilst controlling democratic elections. Islamist jihadists and fascists are adept at using the same methods with the same skill to subvert pluralism; quiet 'moderates'; and develop a terror state.

real world as well the philosophical world of Islamic doctrine makes this obvious. Islamic thinkers and leaders, those truly committed to an Islamic state, have no interest in pluralism of any variety. Islamic states are one party affairs with no democratic, party, or religious diversity or opposition. They are Nazified creations – with the added power of a melded church and state complex, something even the Nazis did not achieve. Consider some real world examples.

Demography

Most people would be astonished by this. The drop in Moslem babies is of course great news. Islam, which is presented by the Western media as pacific, tolerant, sophisticated and socially cohesive is of course the opposite in reality. Vitally as the Moslem world urbanizes, its birth rate has fallen by over ½ in the aggregate. Islamic politicians in Turkey and Iran for example have set 2040 as the 'end date' of their so-called 'civilisations'. Within 30 years the decline in both Turkic and Persian-Mede fertility will herald an irreversible decline in both populations. The same is true elsewhere in the Moslem world.

The UN’s  World Population Prospects Report makes it clear the fertility decline in the Moslem world is indeed a world-wide phenomenon. The report compares birth rates from about 1970 to 2003-7. The analysis reveals that the largest Moslem states are becoming infertile and are approaching European and Japanese infertility rates. For example in Indonesia which has the world’s largest Muslim population [230 million], the fertility rate has dropped from 5.6 in 1970, to 2.02 today, which is below the replacement level. The same UN assessment sees huge declines in Bangladesh (from 6.5 to 2.2) and Malaysia (4.7 to 2.4) during this same period. By 2050, even Pakistan is expected to reach a replacement-level fertility rate down from 7.1 in 1970, and 3.8 in 2005.

Dhummies/Dhimmies

For most of modern history we can issue forth this truism: the left wing elements of the modern world, including academia, unions, bureaucrats, the media, political opportunists and self-appointed experts have always aligned themselves with fascism and totalitarianism. So it goes with Islam. It is a peculiar and perverse fascination. The two creeds – socialist Marxism and fascist Islam - have prima facie, nothing in common. Yet one common element unites these two perverse and destructive ideologies. It is their hatred of the Christian West and the modern world. In fact the ideology of Islam resonates with communitarian Marxism, and there is much in similarity between extreme socialism and the fascist totalitarian construct of an Islamic state. Indeed the entire Islamic world, save Iraq and Afghanistan now under Western imperial domination, is a broad and ugly swathe of Islamic Marxist orientation. Perhaps the Western left sees its salvation and continued relevance in the power of the Islamic model – which is another variant of extreme socialism. 

A hatred of Christianity, modernity and individuality permeates both concepts.....

Golden Age Myths

We are constantly told a lie that Moorish Spain was a multicultural nirvana of unbounded development and civilisation. Even the Great Obama, that most important of humans, has rendered his divine opinion in various speeches which refer to 'Cordoba', the Moorish capital as an example of inter-faith success, and a glorious period of learning in which all 'faiths' learnt from each other. It makes a nice UN advertisement, but this idea is of course almost wholly false. The Muslims invaded Spain in 710 AD because Visigothic Spain was rich, advanced, heavily engineered with crops, roads and aqueducts and urbanized. All of the supposed 'achievements' by the Moors were actually Visigothic. All of the architecture, save the Alhambra in Granada which was designed by a Jew, were Visigothic. The Spanish successor to Roman Hispania simply astonished the Arabs and Moors with its wealth and sophistication including of course the arts, the literature and engineering. We know this because the Arabs left records at their amazement over Spain's riches.

But today of course in our current dark age, the real history becomes rewritten and all credit for the advanced civilisation of Spain is rendered to the 'genius' of the Arabs, a group who have never in history developed an advanced society. The Arabs and Muslims were pretty good at either squatting or using 'Dhimmi' technology, money and people for the Islamic cult's benefit. That does take a certain amount of cunning and skill I suppose. But to conflate the destruction of Visigothic Spain and its use by Muslims with a 'Golden Age' is frighteningly inaccurate. As Mr. Seward reminds the reader, the life of the Dhimmi non-Muslim in Spain was one of fear, losing life, assets and money; being plundered, being raped, or being sold off into slavery:

"Every year the Christian territories were devastated, crops burnt, fruit trees cut down, buildings razed, livestock driven off and the inhabitants herded back to the slave-markets. Those who escaped were cowed by ingenious atrocities, the victims' heads being salted as trophies to impress the caliph's unruly subjects....The Reconquista was a holy war."

In the West

At the risk of going to jail for 'thought crimes', it is laughingly obvious to any who study the political-economy, that the cult of multiculturalism, was always destined to fail. Uni-cultures, premised on natural law rights, freedom, political representation, open-trade, and military preparedness survive. Multi-cults who posit the inane and immoral idea that all cultures are the same and that the history's of all people are 'similar and important' create states riven by group 'rights', ghetto mentalities and the destructiveness of state power. The multi-cult is the surest path for a state to force 'conformity', elevate its power to ensure 'equality of cultures', and indoctrinate its citizenry in the cult of the state, as it deposes and reduces the original majoritorian culture to a theology which not only must be rejected, but even criminalized. Thus, if you criticise the failure of a moon-cult from Mecca, and dare to argue that Muslim baths, worship rooms, and state-financed mosques are deleterious to the greater society, than you must be punished and imprisoned for hate crimes.

Iran

One of the great hoary myths is that all, most, or `the great majority`of Muslims are peaceful, unsupportive of Islamic fascism and quite willing to accommodate themselves to Western ways and mores. It is in this context that the recent Iranian elections are being reported. According to Western news outlets few in Iran want the Ahmadinejad gang and his Mullah friends in power. This is another lie. Fascisms never survive without widespread support – and international allies. My guess is that a large plurality of Iranians do support theocratic fascism. 

No one knows who voted for what in Iran but two things are clear. First, the Mousavi candidacy whilst marginally better than the Ahmadinejad cult and the Mullahs, was still an Islamist and fundamentalist proposition. A Western supporter and reformer he is not, and the Mullahs who run the country and who are selected and not elected, would have been unaffected by a Mousavi victory. Second, out of about 35 million voting age Iranians at least 20 million, and quite likely upwards of 25 million Iranian voters, accepted and supported the Ahmadinejad regime. This is the real story in Iran – the widespread acclamation that the Ahmadinejad regime enjoys. 

Islamic history

The Hajj means friction and denoted the rubbing of a black stone at the Meccan Kabaa shrine by females against their genitalia. This friction was thought to induce fertility by rubbing the holy rock against the woman's reproductive area. It would be hard to find a more irresolutely pagan practice than this, with perhaps child sacrifice being an exception. This pre-Muhammadan practice had existed for hundreds of years within Arabia dating to at least the birth of Christ. Post-Muhammad the Hajj signified the Moslem duty to journey to Mecca, to spend money, to enrich the locals, and to follow the timeless pagan Arab rituals of rock, stone, and devil worship, as well as circumambulating the Kabaa and kissing its black rock.

This was an ageless and important ceremony in pre-Muhammadan Mecca. Indeed the market square around the cube or Kabaa was infested with prostitution, and many historians speculate that sex orgies were a part of the ritualized offering to the black asteroid rock which was housed in the cube and which represented heavenly power. Rubbing the genitalia with such a rock might have been a prelude to a sexual offering.

In Muhammad and the Religion of Islam, published in 1984, historian John Gilchrist offers the reader a detailed glimpse into this pre-historical era of pagan Arabia. It is a world of superstition, demons, moon deities, celestial reverence, illiteracy, banditry, poverty and under-development. No civilisation worth the name existed there. As historian Gilchrist comments:

The ramial-jimar ceremony at Mina, like many other ceremonies in the Hajj, places a great emphasis on stones - further evidence of pagan Arab practices surviving to this day for the pre-Islamic idol-worshippers worshipped not only stones but had a stone-throwing ceremony in their rites. [Gilchrist, Mohammed, 1984]

Islamic Theology

Karahah sometimes spelled Kariha in the Koran, means 'hate', 'dislike' or 'averse to'. It is used in connection with the Unbelievers or those who reject Muhammad's commands and leadership. First, Moslems might not like fighting the Infidel but Allah wills them to do it. Remember humans have no free-will in Islam, only the Al-Lah moon deity possesses free-will. Second, Unbelievers must be fought since they 'hate' Muhammad's cult. Third, the Infidels are 'averse to' and quite 'dislike' the diktats of the El-Lah thing, and must be brought into line through coercion and intractable purpose. The Arabic word for hate permeates all sections of the Koran.

Al-Lah wills you to fight for him [or it]

2:216 Jihad (holy fighting in Allah's Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.

58:8 Have you not seen those who were forbidden to hold secret counsels, and afterwards returned to that which they had been forbidden, and conspired together for sin and wrong doing and disobedience to the Messenger (Muhammad SAW). And when they come to you, they greet you with a greeting wherewith Allah greets you not, and say within themselves: "Why should Allah punish us not for what we say?Hell will be sufficient for them, they will burn therein, and worst indeed is that destination!

61:9 He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger Muhammed SAW) hate (it).

10:82 "And Allah will establish and make apparent the truth by His Words, however much the Mujrimun (criminals, disbelievers, polytheists, sinners, etc.) may hate it."

The Koran

In 'The Encyclopedia of Islam', there are 3 scholars who are sourced in resolving the issue of the ordering of the Suras – Noldeke, Blachere and Weiss. These men went to the source material of the Koran, including the Hadiths, scripts, and writings which pre-dated the invention of the Koran. They sifted through Arabic and Muslim material and developed a definitive chronological order of the last Medinan Suras. Whilst there are some variations in their ordering, the lists in othe rdering of the Medinan, or latest Suras, are rather similar:

Weil: 2, 98, 62, 65, 22, 4, 8, 47, 57, 3, 59, 24, 63, 33, 48, 110, 61, 60, 58, 49, 66, 9, 5.

Noldeke and Blachere: 2, 98, 64, 62, 8, 47, 3, 61, 57, 4, 65, 59, 33, 63, 24, 58, 22, 48, 66, 60, 110, 49, 9, 5.

The 3 scholars are in broad agreement on the order of the last 'grouping' of Koranic Suras. From the list above it is clear that Suras 9 and 5 are the most important. Both are reviewed here and here. Other scholars such as Sir William Muir concur that 9 and 5 are the last two Suras. Sahih Bukhari, in his Hadiths, volume 6, book 60, # 129 (or 5.59.650) confirms this stating: "The last Sura that was revealed was Bara’…" Bara is Sura 9.

[un]Holy Koran !

It is amusing and disquieting when one receives emails from the Dhimmis – or Muslim lovers – screaming that Islam is peace and there is no compulsion in the Koran and that anyone who writes the truth about Islam is a racist, fascist, conservative Hitlerite etc. These Dhimmi-wits often cite Sura 2:256 which indeed does say, out of context, that there is no compulsion in religion. But what the Dhimmis don't understand is that in this single verse – the only one they can find in the entire Koran –  non-Muslims are assumed to be slaves and there is no compulsion towards your slaves. Why would there be ? Slaves work, toil and pay the jizya or slave-head tax. Why force revenue producing agents into being Islamic ?

As I wrote in reviewingSura 2, verse 256 is always held up to be the example of Islamic tolerance and love. This is however, entirely misleading. 2:256 says, “Let there be no compulsion in religion.” It is directly followed by 2:257 which makes it clear what 2:256 is really saying, “Allah is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons are the Evil Ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of darkness. They will be Companions of the fire, to dwell therein (forever)"

It is obvious that 2:256 is referring to the fact that in Koranic theology the compulsion of slaves or Dhimmis is unnecessary, since the moon deity, Ali-ilah is going to send them to hell anyways. This is confirmed elsewhere in the same Sura where we have a dozen or more calls to Jihad:

90. Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you... 


191. And slay them wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; 

Slavery

Apparently Hub-Al[lah] the Moslem moon diety and 'ilah' or Lord of the pagan Gods was a racist. Racism abounds in the Koran, with Blacks and 'Black Faces' singled out as inferior. Muhammad stated that Blacks were stupid. Black slavery was an important economic crutch for the lighter skin Arabs in pre-Muhammadan Arabia. Most Arab families, like Muhammad's, had Black slave-servants, and much of the rather poor economic development of Arabia was premised in part on the work of Black slaves. Kufar or  Infidel was originally a word applied to African Blacks. Some 11 million of whom were transhipped to the Greater Arabian and Moslem empires over a 1100 year period. An unremarked upon catalogue of human misery.

To transship 11 million humans typically meant that 2 or 3 times that amount had to be 'found' and preyed upon. The death rate from capture to the initial stages of forced marches in chains is according to most historians, in the 50-60% range, meaning that 20 odd million Blacks over 1100 years were captured by Arab and Moslem flesh hunters and that about ½ of this total might have survived and made it to the northern Moslem realms. [to say nothing of the 10 million Whites taken by Moslems as slaves....]

vs. Christianity

Maybe moderate Muslims and their Marxist-PC cultist enablers can explain the following Koranic injunctions which demand the eradication of Christians:
  1. 2:190-193 Fight in the cause of God, those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for God loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out: For tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; But fight them not at the sacred Mosque unless they first fight you there; But if they fight you, Slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. But if they cease, God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."
  2. 2:216-217 Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But God knoweth, and ye know not. They ask thee concerning fighting in the Prohibited Month. Say: "Fighting therein is a grave (offense); but graver is it in the sight of God to prevent access to the path of God, to deny Him, to prevent access to the Sacred Mosque, and drive out its members. Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. Nor will they cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith if they can. And if any of you turn back from their faith and die in unbelief, their works will bear no fruit in this life and in the Hereafter; they will be Companions of the Fire and will abide therein.
  3. 2:244-245 Then fight in the cause of God, and know that God heareth and knoweth all things. Who is he that will loan to God a beautiful loan, which God will double unto his credit and multiply many times? It is God that giveth (you) want or plenty, and to Him shall be your return.

Women

The world of the Koran and of Islam is cleanly cleaved into two sections. On the one side are the great, the good, the faithful and the to be rewarded who follow Mohammed and his alter-ego, Allah. On the other side of the great divide are the Unbelievers, the Unjust, the Criminals, the Sinners, the Idolaters, the Pagans, the Damned, or anyone male or female, who does not follow the moon-cult and Koranic theology. Yes it really is that simple. There is no objective ethics within the Koran, just restatements of supremacism, racism and lurid tales of doom and eternal damnation for those who reject Mohammed's cult. That is basically the Koran in a nutshell. One of the most apposite phrases which clearly describes the intention of this cult is the following, written after the Mohammedan's had started their bloody imperialist domains in Arabia: 40-40: Whosoever does an evil deed, will not be requited except the like thereof, and whosoever does a righteous deed, whether male or female and is a true believer (in the Oneness of Allah), such will enter Paradise, where they will be provided therein (with all things in abundance) without limit.

This is the 'Golden Rule' in the Koran. When a Muslim says 'oh yeah, the Koran and Islam contain the Christian Golden Rule as well', they are liars. The phrase above is about as clear as one can get. 'Whosoever does a righteous deed [following the Koran in other words], and is a true believer [of Mohammed and the Koran], will enter Paradise.' I doubt that the theme of the Koran can be more clearly or easily expressed. Follow us and win earthly and heavenly salvation. Oppose us and die.

9-68 Allah has promised the hypocrites; men and women, and the disbelievers, the Fire of Hell, therein shall they abide. It will suffice them. Allah has cursed them and for them is the lasting torment.

 
The cult of Islam | Scoop.it
All the new curated posts for the topic: The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: David Wood and the top 10 Koranic verses of hate speech against 'Unbelievers'
David Wood and the top 10 Koranic verses of hate speech against (David Wood and the top 10 Koranic verses of hate speech against 'Unbelievers': Probably the best 8 minute video...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Liberty GB's Enza Ferreri on Western Civilisation and Christianity
The importance of Christianity in the development of Western civilisation.


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Jihad is an obligation to wage war against non-Moslems.
Jihad is an obligation to wage war against non-Moslems. This is why the Moslem cult is so violent. (Jihad is an obligation to wage war against non-Moslems.: Jihad is an Arabic word which sends the multi-cult into...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Bukhari's Hadiths: 2nd half of volume 1 - the incitement to violence and supremacism
Bukhari (Bukhari's Hadiths: 2nd half of volume 1 - the incitement to violence and supremacism: A list of violent Hadiths... http://t.co/46K72iYUsh)


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Bukhari's Hadiths: First half of volume 1 - the incitement to violence and supremacism
Bukhari (Bukhari's Hadiths: First half of volume 1 - the incitement to violence and supremacism: A list of violent Hadiths...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Roger Scruton: Liberty & Democracy in Western Civilisation
Conservative philosopher Roger Scruton delivers the keynote address at the IPA's 2014 Foundations of Western Civilisation Symposium.


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
How Muslim woman Are Brainwashed by the Quran and Islam
Shocking video! An Islamic Muslim woman (a Palestinian from Hamas controlled territory in Gaza), whose child received and needed medical care in Israel, was ...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
"Holy Quran Converted Me to Christianity" says Imam Sulaiman aka Mario Joseph
Critics argue that India does not have Muslims by the name of Sulaiman ibn Ahmad is a last resort to attack his credibility. Now Hebrew word ben or ibn in Ar...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Global Pathology (Again)
There is nothing new about religious fascism or caliphates. There is nothing new about rape, infanticide, honor killings, genocide, misogyny, slavery -- or headless journalism either.


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Christian Faith is Not Hate
There is absolutely nothing in the video of Rev. Robby Gallaty's recent sermon that is threatening, hateful, cruel, or the result of ignorance.


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Islam's hatred of Christianity and by extension, of Christmas
Islam

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
True Moslems must hate the symbols of Christianity. The Koran mandates such intolerance by first disavowing Christianity as pagan and criminal, and second by outlawing the veneration of any religious symbols. Therefore Moslems cannot abide by any Christian or Christmas symbol including the cross, a Christmas tree, a Christmas decoration, or the nativity. Most cities in the West have been cowed by the Moslem supremacists to remove public votives of Christian theology at Christmas time. Gone are stars on trees; nativity scenes; and even crosses. The Koran is very clear that Christians are polytheist criminals and must be killed, crucified, and humiliated to quote Sura 5:33. The Trinity is declared by the Koran to be a polytheism, and Christian symbols representations of that 'error'.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: The Allah thing - aka Muhammad - hates Christians
The Allah thing - aka Muhammad - hates Christians Koranic supremacism.

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
The Koran changes dramatically over time. When mad Mohammed was in Mecca trying to sell himself as a prophet in the line of Jewish and Christian tradition he was more accommodating of Christians. In fact much of his monotheistic program was of course stolen from the Jewish and Christian faiths. Once Mohammed was exiled from Mecca by his own tribe the Quraysh finding refuge in Medina, the Koran and Allah the moon guy's 'revelations' suddenly become much darker, more intolerant and violent. Islam becomes a jihadic enterprise with those who rejected the 'prophet' targeted for annihilation, including of course the followers of Christ who would not accept the illiterate Arab politician as the successor to the Jewish rabbi from Nazareth.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Christianophobia – Islam's hatred of Christians, Sura 4 [first part thereof]
Christianophobia – Islam

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
The Koran is a long anti-Christian, anti-Jew rant, replete with lurid calls of violence and killing. Supremacist theology negates a true religion. In Sura 4 or 'The Women', in the first 90 verses, one finds 30 Christianophic statements. Quite a large amount from a cult supposedly dedicated to world happiness.

Most of this Sura is a recitation of early Iron Age 'Laws', something one would expect from a backwards Bedouin society of pilfering nomads. Most of the statutes are banal, obtuse and emanate from an uncultured impoverished manner of living. Consider the following 'law', passed on by the 'great' Muhammad on behalf of the moon deity Hub'Al:

004:022* URL
And marry not women whom your fathers married, except what has already passed; indeed it was shameful and most hateful, and an evil way.

Don't marry a woman your father married. How enlightening. How about this prohibition against first-family incest or sex with your 'suckling sisters' ?

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Articles: Can Islam reform?

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
No.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
#myjihad: Jihadi leader to Christians: Convert to Islam or die
"Christians must choose "Islam or death," while their women and daughters may legitimately be regarded as wives of Muslims" The enemedia's criminal silence on the relentless and bloody march of Islamic surpremacists on the backs and the bodies...

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
Just following the Koranic fascism of the cult of mad Moh....

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
'Generation Identity' Wages War on France Islamization--Failed Multiculturaism&Welfare Spending Could Lead to Civil War
CBN News has been the leader in reporting on the steady Islamization of France. Now there is another sign that France is breaking down: the rise of 'Generation Indentity.'

PARIS - It was a political protest with shock value, the likes of which has never been seen on French TV news: a group of young people stormed a mosque in the city of Portiers, going to the roof and unfurling a banner calling for a national referendum on Muslim immigration.

The banner included the number 732, the year Charles Martel defeated the Islamic invasion in Portiers.

The group calls itself Generation Identitaire, or Generation Identity. They say they are at war with "the 68'ers," the baby boomers who run France, for wrecking their future with multicultural policies that some fear are turning France into a Muslim nation.

They released a video called "A Declaration of War."

In the video, members say, "We are Generation Identitaire. We are the generation of ethnic fracture, the total failure of coexistence, and the forced mixing of races. We have stopped believing in a 'Global Village' and the 'Family of Man.'"

Their rhetoric sounds racist, but they say they do not believe in racial superiority or racial stereotypes. Rather, they fear losing France to Muslim immigrants from Africa.

CBN News interviewed a leader of the group, Julien Langella, in the southern French city of Toulon.

"It's not about hate of other people," Langella insisted. "It's about heritage. It's about loving our people and our land. And we fight for this."

Groups like Generation Identitaire are symptoms of a nation that is coming unglued. They are an unintended but a predictable by-product of a failed multiculturalism that, instead of creating a melting pot, has created ethnic tribalism and dangerous "no-go zones."

"Assimilation is now impossible in France," Langella said. "It was possible when immigrants came from European countries because they are like us ethnically; they are like us culturally."

The French Republic, which is supposed to be strictly secular, has actively helped Muslims build mosques and spread Sharia law. Polls show most French are alarmed about it.

Renaud Camus, one of France's leading writers, said flatly that France is being colonized by Muslim immigrants with the help of the government and the media. He calls it "The Great Replacement."

"The Great Replacement is very simple," he explained. "You have one people, and in the space of a generation, you have a different people."

"Practically every day Catholic Churches are attacked, and people (are stoned) in a very old Muslim tradition. And if they can't deny that this has happened, they say that this is the result of racism," he said.

Generation Identitaire is also upset that their future has been looted by the baby boomers' out-of-control welfare spending.

In their video, they say, "We are the generation doubly punished: condemned to pay into a social system so generous with strangers it becomes unsustainable for our own people. Our generation is the victims of the May '68'ers, who wanted to liberate themselves from tradition, from knowledge and authority in education."

Aurélie Lamacq, a member of Generation Identitaire, said she is angry with the baby boomers for leaving a mess for her generation "because they had everything."

"They had the cool job. It was easy at the time to buy a flat or house. Their children were secure, and they have taken everything from us," Lamacq charged.

She added that she too no longer believes in cultural assimilation between Christians and Arab immigrants.

"We can't live together because we are not the same ethnically," she said. "We don't have the same religion. We don't have the same way of life, the same values. We have nothing in common. Nothing."

Some believe France is on a trajectory toward more social conflict over immigration and perhaps, someday, civil war.

"The political elite has to understand that it's a fight to the death because it's a matter of survival," Langella said.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Challenging the Cults: Answering Muslims (Islam)
Answering the cult from a Christian perspective: What to say to Muslims, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormans, The New Age and others.

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
The first declaration in becoming a Muslim is to acknowledge there is no God but Allah and that Mohammad is His prophet. From the beginning in Islam, the name of Islam’s God, Allah is next to Islam’s prophet. Mohammad as the prophet of Islam received a revelation he claimed by the God of Abraham through the angel Gabriel, this revelation Muslims believe is contained in the pages of the Quran. Muslims believe in Heaven there is an identical book to the Quran, which is written in Arabic. The Quran, delivered in intervals by the angel Gabriel to Mohammad over a period of 22 years. (A.D. 610-632).

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
190 Muhammads Characteristics Part 190
Idiots Guide to Islam http://alrassoolilive.blogspot.com/


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Christianophobia – Islam's hatred of Christians, Sura 3 [2nd part thereof]
Christianophobia – Islam

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
Within the first 100 verses of Sura 3, there were only 47 Christianophobic statements. This is deemed 'moderate' liturgy by the really clever people. In the second half of Sura 3, there are only 30 verses identifying Christians as inferiors, destined for Hell, ripe to be violated and attacked. Big brains and Moslems will declare that this proves the tolerance of the cult of Muhammad. In reality the Koran and by extension Arab and Moslem culture is decidedly supremacist and Christianophobic. The book Recital demands that Moslems kill, subjugate or humiliate the followers of Christ. Both Jesus and Christians are ridiculed in the Koran with Christ mocked as a mere prophet of Allah; a man who did not perform miracles, and was unworthy to be equated with Muhammad the political-military adventurer.

In the second half of Sura 3, or the Family of 'Imran, the following Christianophobic themes are presented:

1) Christians are inferior to Moslems -- so ignore them.

2) Christians are going to Hell and can be killed.

3) The Moslem cult must never be divided.

The Koranic cult is supremacist and racist. Christianity is inferior. It must be either destroyed or the church and its followers in-toto, must be brought under Islamic control and guidance. Those are the only 2 options.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Western Civilisation :: Christianophobia – Islam's hatred of Christians, Sura 3 [first part thereof]
Christianophobia – Islam

Ibn Sufi al Kitab's insight:
Number of verses in Sura 3: 200
Number of verses in the first part of Sura 3: 100
Number of verses of Christianophia in the first part of Sura 3: 47
% of Christianophobic verses in the first part of Sura 3 of the total: 47 %

According to Marxists, Secularists, cult worshippers of the state, the warm [weather fascists], the homosexual, the feminists, and sundry other worthies, Islam and perforce all Moslems, are pro-Christian 'extremists', spending most of their day eagerly kissing, embracing and loving their 'brothers' and co-equal 'people of the book'. Back in the real world, historically for 1400 years, Christians have been enslaved, slaughtered, raped, and confined to second-class dhimmitude status within the Moslem world. Does the Koran promote this hatred of Christians ? Is there Koranic Christianophobia ? Curious minds would like to know.

In Sura 3, or the Family of 'Imran, the following Christianophobic themes are presented:

1) Christians are going to Hell for disbelieving in Islam and Muhammad.

2) Christians must be humiliated and killed.

3) Christians must deny the Trinity and their own beliefs.

See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Pakistani Christian Girl Raped and Tortured for Eleven Days « Persecution News

Raping and torturing young girls.....isn't that what all intolerant cults do ?



See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
The Evil Teachings of Islam
It's time to wake up. The real muslims are the terrorist who are following the teachings within the quran. We are not the one's who say they are killing in t...


See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Egypt and the Death of the ‘Arab Spring’

Nearly two years after the “Arab Spring” began in Egypt, the nation’s Muslim Brotherhood president has arrogated to himself dictatorial powers, and is ramming through a new constitution that will effectively extinguish the last vestiges of Egyptian democracy and establish Egypt as a Sharia state. Just as I said back in January 2011, when the uprisings against Mubarak began, for the people in Egypt who had real power to affect change, the “Arab Spring” was never about democracy and pluralism, despite the ululations of the Western press; it was always about imposing Islamic law upon Egypt. And now, with the new constitution, here we are.



See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
Guess how many Islamic terror attacks since 9/11

These are not the regular beatings and vandalism against Christians, Hindus and Buddhists but religion-oriented attacks in which someone dies at the hand of a member of the”religion of peace.”



See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam
It’s Hatred and Violence in the Qur’an Awareness Month!

Have you done your shopping yet? It’s Hatred and Violence in the Qur’an Awareness Month — what better time to buy a bomb vest for the mujahid you love?

Inspired by a remark from Pat Condell in this video, I have proclaimed December to be Hatred and Violence in the Qur’an Awareness Month. After all, November was Islamophobia Awareness Month, and certainly the hatred and violence in the Qur’an kills many, many more people than “Islamophobia” ever has or ever will, and so it is far more deserving than “Islamophobia” of a month of its own.



See it on Scoop.it, via The cult of Islam