Separating the Kafirs from the Muslims

When the al Shabaab jihadi group from Somalia attacked the mall in Kenya, they gathered the crowd together and asked who were Muslims and let them go. According to the media, they then started killing the non-Muslims who were left. But non-Muslims is not the word what the terrorists would have used. No, they would have called them Kafirs (actually they would have called them the Arabic plural of kafir, kuffar. Kafirs is the standard English plural form).

Why did members of al Shabaab do this? Why did they ask the Muslims to leave and keep the Kafirs and start killing them? Let’s start with the word terrorists. Members of al Shabaab are not terrorists, they are jihadists or mujahedeen. That is what they call themselves.

So what difference does it make which words we use? Non-Muslim or Kafir? Terrorists, militants, jihadists or mujahedeen? It makes all the difference in the world. You cannot think precisely with imprecise words and a Kafir is much more than non-Muslim.

The word “non-Muslim” does not imply anything, except not being a believer in Islam.

Kafir, on the other hand, has enormous implications. Kafir is the actual word that the Koran uses for a non-Muslim. Indeed, one of the many remarkable things about the Koran is that over half of its text is devoted to the Kafir. Think about that: most of the Koran is not about how to be a Muslim, but about the Kafir. Every single verse about the Kafir is not just bad, but terrible. Allah hates Kafirs and plots and schemes against them. The cruelest punishments await the Kafir in hell, but who cares about that? The real problem is what is promised to the Kafir in this life—torture, hatred, death, ridicule, rape, enslavement, political domination and deception.

It is the same with mujahedeen or jihadist as opposed to militant or terrorist. The words militant or terrorist do not tell anything about the motivation of the militant or terrorist, only that they are using violence.

Notice that the words non-Muslim and terrorist are not related to each other; they stand alone. There is no implication of one by the other. But that is not true about Kafir and jihad. Jihad is only carried out against Kafirs. Jihad implies Kafir and vice versa.

Jihad and Kafir are all part of a system of Islamic politics. Mohammed preached the religion of Islam for 13 years and garnered 150 followers. When he turned to politics and jihad, he died ruler of all of Arabia, and every Arab was a Muslim. The religion of Islam was a failure, and Islam triumphed by the use of politics and jihad, war against the Kafir.

Islamic doctrine is found in the Koran, Sunna (Mohammed) and Sharia law and divides all of humanity into Muslim and Kafir. There is no middle ground. Unfortunately, both Christian and Jewish leaders have bought into the fiction that they are all People of the Book and are brothers in religion. When you read the fine print (as none of them have done, being professionally ignorant), they are brothers in Abraham who must be politically and religiously subjugated, but that is a small detail.

If jihad, mujahedeen, and Kafir are pure Islamic doctrine, we can now understand why the media refuses to the correct words that Muslims use – it is all too horrible to contemplate. We are not just having independent terrorist events, such as the West Gate Mall in Nairobi, Kenya or the Boston Marathon bombing; we are in the middle of a civilizational war with a historic enemy — an enemy who is winning because we are in total denial.

Published as an article on American Thinker. 

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink: https://politicalislam.com/separating-the-kafirs-from-the-muslims/
Copyright © 2013 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.
www.politicalislam.com

The jihadists — on this occasion the Indian Mujahadeen — are at it again. On a Sunday in July nine bombs went off in Buddhism’s most sacred place, Bodh Gaya in India. The jihadists said the bombing was in retaliation for the Buddhists resisting jihad in Myanmar. This would be the equivalent of bombing the Wailing Wall, St. Paul’s Cathedral, Bethlehem or the Kabbah. But, since Buddhists are the least political of all religions, the media barely noticed.

This jihad attack may have long term consequences for jihad, due to favorable attitudes toward and perceptions of Buddhists, and who Buddhists are. Buddhism is the pet religion of the media, Leftists, Progressives and Liberals, and even those who are right of center find it hard to dislike Buddhism. Buddhism is truly the religion of peace, not like that other “religion of peace” with the jihad doctrine and 1400 years of conquest.

But the Left and Liberals are also the apologists for Islam, and one of the ways apologists deny the brutality of Islam is to attack its victims as somehow deserving of the jihadist attacks. When Christians are killed every week by jihadists, the leftist types justify it because of the Crusades and other wars by nations that are primarily Christian. When 30 Christian children are murdered in Nigeria, it is considered payback for the Crusades. (The Crusades lasted for 300 years and the last one was 800 years ago.) And any Jews killed are payback for the purported Israeli persecution of the so-called Palestinians. Put another way, the apologists for Islam figure that most of those who are killed in jihad deserve it.

So, the apologists for Islam are in a quandary. Jihad is hurting Buddhists, but it would be bigoted to complain about it. The denial machine is set to spin — those jihadists were not real Muslims or else they were just a few crazies.

A second problem for the apologists is their theory that if Muslims are treated right, they won’t be violent. This is the “treat the Palestinians right and they will do right” theory of dealing with Islam. This gets expanded to the theory that all Islamic violence is due to how the Palestinians are treated. Well, bombing Buddhists in India has no connection to Palestine.

Many Buddhists are absolute pacifists who hold to the “if you do good, good will come to you” school of politics. The problem is that such Buddhists usually cannot figure out why Muslims believe that being a Buddhist is evil. They may be ignorant of Islamic doctrine that says that the only good that can come out of a Buddhist is submission to Islam.

Buddhist doctrine holds that we need both compassion and wisdom. But the wisdom aspect does not seem to be highlighted when the Dalai Lama says that the attacks are “very sad” while noting that it could be an act of a “few individuals” and “shouldn’t be considered something serious.”

If the Dalai Lama would pick up the clue phone, he would hear this: “Hello, the Buddhism that you practice, Vajrayana Buddhism, came from the Swat Valley in Afghanistan and where is Buddhism now? It has been annihilated from Afghanistan by jihadists. That same doctrine of jihad is annihilating Buddhists in Thailand today. Is that sad enough for you?” Jihad seeks to annihilate all religions in the territory that Muslims enter. And that should be considered as something serious.

But bombing Bodh Gaya has a down side for the jihadists. A few of the usual apologists may decide that if jihad means bombing Buddhists, then maybe, just maybe, there is something fundamentally wrong with Islam. Islam’s apologists have a lot more trouble in justifying the justice of jihad against Buddhists since the jihad is against their own political alliance.

So bombing Buddhists may be a tactical victory, but it could a long-term strategic error but, only if the Buddhists and the apologists pay attention to murder of their own.

Published in American Thinker

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink: https://politicalislam.com/bombing-the-buddhists/

Copyright © 2013 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.
www.politicalislam.com

There is an enormous irony contained in the Boston Marathon bombing. When the jihadi Tsarnaev brothers car jacked a Mercedes, it had a Coexist bumper sticker.

The Coexist bumper sticker is the religious symbol of the multicultural crowd — you know — all religions are the same. Well, the leading symbol of those who want to Coexist is the star and crescent Islam. And exactly how well has Islam coexisted with all of the others? What kind of neighbor has Islam been over history?

Start with Mohammed. We know an enormous amount about Mohammed as a neighbor to Kafirs (non-Muslims), pagans, Jews and Christians.

When Mohammed was in Mecca before he became a Muslim, he was a good neighbor who was prosperous and helped to settle disputes. But, that all changed when he became the prophet of Allah. Once he became a public preacher of Islam, he became an irritant to his neighbors. You see, not only did Mohammed know what was right, he demanded that everybody do everything his way, Allah’s way. He was a neighbor who was always right and you were always wrong. Not only were you wrong, but your parents and grandparents were wrong. Mohammed no longer settled arguments; he created arguments. After 13 years of this, the Meccans told Mohammed to leave Mecca.

So he went to the town of Medina, which was half Jewish. And what kind of neighbor was Mohammed to the Jews? Put briefly, two years later, Medina was Judenrein (cleansed of Jews). When he arrived, there were three tribes of Jews. In rapid order, the first tribe was driven out of town, bereft of their goods. Then the second tribe of Jews was exiled. They were lucky. The last of the Jewish tribes suffered the most. The women were enslaved and sold wholesale for money to purchase horses and arms for jihad. For the rest of his life, Mohammed used slavery to help finance his jihad. The children were kidnapped and adopted into Muslim families to be raised as Muslims. Then the 800 male Jews were all beheaded.

But wait. Mohammed was not through coexisting with the Jews. Later he left Medina and went to Khaybar and attacked them. Mohammed crushed them, took their wealth and put them to work under the Sharia to work as dhimmis and give him half of what they earned. That was how Mohammed coexisted with the Jews.

But Mohammed was not through with coexisting with the Arabians. He attacked the Meccan caravans. His jihadists killed, kidnapped, stole, assassinated and fought the pagan Arabs at every turn. Mohammed’s coexistence policy with the Arabs was jihad. This went on until every Arab became a Muslim.

After Mohammed has made every soul in Arabia convert to Islam, he turned his coexistence policy to the Christians north of Arabia in Syria. He attacked the Christians the losers became dhimmis just like the Jews.

Dhimmis are the way that the Sharia allows Kafirs to coexist within a Muslim society. The dhimmi is a third class non-citizen who pays special taxes and has no real civil rights. A dhimmi could not testify against a Muslim in court, for instance.

Look at how Islam coexisted with Africa. A coexistence clue is that Arabic has one word, “abd”, that means both black slave and African. Context must supply which meaning is used. Islam ran the slave trade on the West coast, East coast and Mediterranean coasts of Africa. Islam sold every slave that was brought to the Americas. Conservative estimates are that 120 million Africans were killed in the jihad that produced all of the slaves in Africa.

How did Islam coexist with the Buddhists in what is now Afghanistan? Jihad annihilated every single Buddhist and their libraries and monasteries.

There is a massive data base of the coexistence between Islam and the rest of the world at thereligionofpeace.com. It catalogs more than 20,000 jihad attacks around the world since 9/11 2001. Here is a chart of the data of the top 4 nations as victims of jihad:

Put another way, this is how Islam coexists today with Jews, Buddhists, Christians and Hindus. It practices jihad against all non-Muslims, Kafirs.

The idea of coexist has a social ring to it, we’re all one big happy family. But how do we talk about all religions and not get into which one is right or best? Well, there is an easy way to do it. If you are not a member of a religion, the only thing you care about is how you are treated by those who belong to that religion. In short, you only care about the ethics and character of the adherent.

All of the world’s religions have an ethical code that is rooted in the Golden Rule. Islam does not have a Golden Rule. Mohammed’s life is the perfect example of how not to be a good neighbor. How do you coexist with a neighbor who has the ethical choice of jihad of murder and deceit?

What do religious leaders in American think about coexisting with Islam? They love it. Coexist is the mental mush that fills the heads of the useful idiots that go to the Family of Abraham religious dialogues. The ministers and rabbis who go to these dialogs know as much about Islam as what is found on the Coexist bumper sticker. Really, their ignorance is astounding. They are there to coexist and the imam is there to dominate. Dhimmi Christians and Jews want to tie, the Muslim wants to win.

But the mental mush of coexistence is not just in the heads of the dhimmi religious leaders, it also fills the heads of law enforcement and military. Under Bush and Obama, all of those who actually know something about Islam inside the military and law enforcement have been eliminated. FBI and military training files have been purged to satisfy the Muslim Brotherhood. So our protectors are forbidden to study the war doctrine of political Islam. They are prevented from naming the enemy and studying them.

There is only one way to coexist with Islam over time. Islam must submit to Kafir civilization and we must never submit to Islam, not even in the smallest detail. This means we must all know the smallest details of Islam and that begins with the knowledge of Mohammed and his wars against all Kafirs.

First published in American Thinker.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink: https://politicalislam.com/islam-coexists/
Copyright © 2013 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com
Use as needed, just give credit and do not edit.
www.politicalislam.com

(First published in American Thinker)

The Islamic Society of North American (ISNA) is an organization linked to the Muslim Brotherhood. ISNA was an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terror financing trial ever held. If you go to the ISNA website you find a very interesting list called the Partners of ISNA. Here is a partial list of church Partners:

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Presbyterian Church (USA)
The Union for Reform Judaism
United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
United Methodist Church
Unitarian Universalist Association

How do these Partners of ISNA work? They work very hard serving Mohammed and Allah. Their first job is to be ignorant of Islamic doctrine. The Partners never show the slightest sign of knowledge about Islam, except to parrot what their Muslim “handlers” tell them.

To assure this ignorance is passed down to the next generation, the Partners use their schools to train the next generation to be as ignorant as they are. In other words, their schools never teach how Christians were dhimmis (semi-slaves) inside of Islam, even in those mythical days of the Islamic Golden Age. The schools of the Partners never teach the Islamic doctrine of the Christians and Jew. There is no Jew hatred in the Partners version of Islam, in spite of Islamic doctrine being more filled with Jew hatred than Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

The Partners never bring up the murder of Christians and Jews to their ISNA masters. When ISNA puts up a condemnation of murder of Christians in Nigeria on their website that is enough for them. They never get around to asking why these murders of Christians has happened for 1400 years and why there will be a one this week.

Instead, the Partners are content to believe the stories of how Islam honors Isa (the Jesus of the Koran) and loves the People of the Book (one of the names for Christians and Jews). Of course, the fact that Isa lacks every quality of Jesus as found in the Gospels never troubles a Partner, since the Partners honor their oath of subservience to Islam and do not read the Koran.

The Jewish Partners are equal in their ignorance when they never mention that the Musa of the Koran is not the Moses of the Torah, in spite of their ISNA masters declarations. Since the Jews are as deliberately ignorant of Islamic doctrine as their Christian Partners they don’t know who the Musa in the Koran is. The willful ignorance of these Christian and Jewish Partners is traitorous.

The banner cry of the Partners is “tolerance”—tolerance of the intolerable. The Partners will tolerate religious genocide, church burnings, rapes, kidnapping, honor killings and lies, as long as they are done by Muslims. The Partners will piously smile when faced with evil, because they are being tolerant.

But there is one thing that that Partners will not tolerate: conversation about the doctrine and history of political Islam. Want to be a bigot? Speak about the suffering of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus and atheists under Islam and down comes the name-calling against those who know and speak out against the evil of Sharia persecution of Kafirs.

Speaking of Sharia, the Partners love it and want it to rule anywhere that ISNA wants. You see, the Partners know that Islam is one of the three great Abrahamic faiths (an Islamic concept that denies both the truth of Christianity and Judaism). They want Islam to practice its religious laws and the Partners want Islam to grow. So when a Christian or Jewish woman approaches a Partner leader and asks if they should marry this nice Muslim man, the Partners insist that that is a wonderful idea. After all, the Partners and Muslims all worship one god. And since the Partners have not the slightest idea of what the Sharia is, they can, in all good ignorance, encourage their sister to marry a Muslim. The fact that the Muslim husband can now follow the Sharia and beat the Christian/Jewish wife is of no concern to a Partner.

The Partners train their congregants to be ignorant so that they can respond like the French Jews in the last murder of Jews by Muslims at Toulouse. These Jews have been well taught how to be ignorant, so that they can say things like: “Why would they do this?”

WHY? Because Allah hates the Jews, Mohammed murdered Jews, raped Jews, enslaved Jews, tortured Jews, and exiled Jews. Hence, in Toulouse, France, a Muslim can murder Jews. It is Sunna. But in the world of Partners, these heinous acts have no explanation, except local politics and poverty. Israel caused it. Right wingers caused it. Anything, except Islam.

Let’s lay our cards on the table. These Partners are Partners in crime, crimes against humanity. These pious wimps are evil themselves, because they curry favor with evil. They willfully practice ignorance, arrogant ignorance, in order to conceal their cowardice. We must call them out, abuse them, and condemn them.

Quotes from religious founders and scholars:

John Wesley, founder of the Methodist church:
“Ever since the religion of Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of it…have been as wolves and tigers to all other nations, rending and tearing all that fell into their merciless paws, and grinding them with their iron teeth; that numberless cities are raised from the foundation, and only their name remaining; that many countries, which were once as the garden of God, are now a desolate wilderness; and that so many once numerous and powerful nations are vanished from the earth! Such was, and is at this day, the rage, the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human kind.”

Martin Luther, founder of the Lutheran church:
“. . . In the second place, the Turk’s Koran, or creed, teaches him to destroy not only the Christian faith, but also the whole temporal government. His Mohammed, as has been said, commands that ruling is to be done by the sword, and in his Koran the sword is the commonest and noblest work.”

“Since . . . Mohammed’s Koran is such a great spirit of lies that it leaves almost nothing of Christian truth remaining, how could it have any other result than that it should become a great and mighty murderer, with both lies and murders under the show of truth and righteousness.”

Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, Roman Catholic Archbishop:
“Today (1950), the hatred of the Moslem countries against the West is becoming hatred against Christianity itself. Although the statesmen have not yet taken it into account, there is still grave danger that the temporal power of Islam may return and, with it, the menace that it may shake off a West which has ceased to be Christian, and affirm itself as a great anti-Christian world Power”.

John Calvin, father of the Reformed and Presbyterian churches:
“Mahomet has reported himself to be the party that should bring the full revelation – over and besides the Gospel. And by means thereof, they [the Islamic Turks] have utterly become brute beasts…. At this day, we see that those poor beasts busy their heads about as doltish and unsensible things as any can be.

It is very significant that Moslems claim Mohammed is a descendant of Abraham via Ishmael. Yet the Apostle Paul wrote in Galatians 4:22-31 that “Abraham had two sons — the one [Ishmael] by a slave; the other [Isaac] by a freewoman…. He who was of the slave, was born according to the flesh; but he [who was born] of the freewoman, was [born] according to the promise.

Moses Maimonides, famous 12the Century Jewish Scholar, persecuted in Islamic Spain
“The nation of Ishmael persecutes us severely and devises ways to harm us and to debase us. None has been able to reduce us as they have. We have done as our sages instructed us, bearing the lies and absurdities of Ishmael. We listen but remain silent. In spite of all this, we are not spared from the ferocity of their wickedness and their outbursts at any time. On the contrary, the more we suffer and choose to conciliate them, the more they choose to act belligerently toward us.”

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink https://politicalislam.com/partners-in-crime/
Copyright © 2012 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

Published in American Thinker

Today we see the politics in Egypt in change and the question of the day is “what will happen to the government?” The details cannot be known, but the future will probably be some version of the past a past is driven by Islamic political doctrine.

All Islamic political doctrine is determined by the example of Mohammed. His rise to power was not by winning elections, but in the use of armed force. Mohammed averaged an event of violence on the average of every six weeks for the last nine years of his life. He may have been the prophet of Allah, but his rule was in parallel to other absolute rulers.

Historically, fascism was a political system in power in Italy in the middle twentieth century. Today, the term has come to mean:

• An authoritarian political system with a strong leader who is glorified.
• Mass demonstrations play a political role.
• Totalitarian rule without an opposing political party.
• Militaristic–advocate the use of force to advance the ideology.

Even the casual observer can see that Islam has many of these features.

Political Domination

Mohammed is the ideal Islamic leader. He rose to power by force of arms—jihad. Jihad was critical in his rise to total and absolute power.

The Sunna (the perfect example of a Muslim life) of Mohammed is found in the Hadith (Traditions) and Sira (his biography). The three texts, Koran, Sira and Hadith, are named the Trilogy. If it is in the Trilogy, it is Islam. If it is not in the Trilogy, it is not Islam. Here is a chart of how much text is devoted to jihad in the Islamic texts:

Jihad is a large part of Islamic doctrine. It is not a verse or two, but a dominant theme. In his jihad phase, Mohammed attacked his nearest neighbor and then the next nearest. He attacked with propaganda and the sword. This remains Islamic hegemonic political doctrine.

Islam’s political purpose is for the entire world to be under Sharia law.

The Elimination of Political Enemies by Force

Islam started as a religious ideology in Mecca, but in Medina it quickly moved to the use of lethal force by men sent out with orders to attack commercial targets, kill, capture and take all wealth. The captured victims were ransomed, executed, enslaved and tortured. The size of the forces ranged from single assassins to small bands and armies.

This military philosophy was so important that it was given a unique name—jihad. What is so brilliant about jihad is its civilizational scope. Armed force was merely the final stage in a system of war against all Kafirs. Jihad is practiced by armed force, speech, writing and cash contributions through charities. (Note: the inner or spiritual jihad is mentioned in less than 2% of texts.)

The graph below shows the efficiency of jihad. The conversion rate went from about ten a year to ten thousand per year.

Jihad has been the most effective system of military force known to humanity. Today, no one kills for Julius Caesar, Napoleon or any other military leader of history. Kafirs die daily because of jihad. Approximately 270 million Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and Africans have been destroyed by jihad over the last 1400 years.

Islam created the word “assassin”. Mohammed repeatedly used assassins to eliminate his political enemies, including artists and intellectuals. A partial list includes:

A Partial List of Assassinated Intellectuals and Leaders

Strong Leader

When Mohammed died he did not have an enemy left standing. All Arabs within his horizon were Muslims. He absolutely and completely dominated all political life in a unified Arabia. Mohammed is the perfect example of an Islamic political leader. He was absolute in his power. He was the judge, lawgiver, military leader, intellectual leader, spiritual leader, and political leader.

He rose to power through his own efforts and became the ultimate strongman. He did not leave behind a process for Islam to choose leaders other than imitating his methods.

Nationalism

All Muslims are a part of the umma, the Islamic community or nation. This concept goes beyond the usual geographic boundaries of nation. The al Qaeda idea of restoring the caliphate is based upon going back to a supreme leader who rises to power and rules all Muslims as the global umma.

The umma means that every Muslim living in a Kafir nation has two allegiances—the nation and Islam. Islam demands that a Muslim’s first allegiance is to the umma, not the nation. Therefore, the Islamic version of nationalism is umma-ism.

Mass demonstrations

Islam does mass demonstrations and riots like a symphony orchestra plays Bach. Demonstrations are a political tradition. The Islamic mass demonstration is so common that we do not really see the brilliance and perfection that is in their execution. Mass demonstrations and riots are happening in Europe and we will soon feel the pressure of them in America when Islam has greater numbers.

Over time Political Islam dominates every country where Islam was introduced. At some point in the process, street riots, mass rallies and assassinations become part of the political process of domination by Islam, until complete political dominance is achieved.

Israel and Islam

At first Islam was kind to the Jews, but in the end Mohammed exiled, enslaved and annihilated every Jew in Arabia. This is recorded in the Trilogy. Examine the next chart:

There is less Jew hatred in Mein Kampf than in the Trilogy. Hence, Islamic texts can be compared to Mein Kampf. Ask this question: if Egypt becomes more Islamic, as the Muslim Brotherhood wants, what will the new Egyptian policy be towards Israel?

Conclusion

Islam has fascist qualities. The next government in Egypt will have a fig leaf of democracy, but if the past is any guide it will be fascist in it implementation and rule. Egypt will become more Sharia compliant, which is bad news for all Christians in Egypt.

Bill Warner, Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink https://politicalislam.com/islam-and-the-egyptian-political-future/
Copyright © 2011 CBSX, LLC, politicalislam.com

THE CIVILIZATION OF ISLAM

One of the clearest lessons about Islam is found in the Sharia. The largest part of the Sharia is devoted to regulating the life of Muslims down to the smallest detail. There is no aspect of life that is not regulated-sex, food, art, business, education, prayer, manners, speech and how to think and not to think. There is no aspect of life that is outside the power of Sharia-religion, politics, ethics, culture are included. The Sharia is the operating manual for a complete civilization. Islam is complete within itself and needs nothing from the outside.

The Sharia has one other quality that is as important as the totality of its scope. The civilization of Sharia is not just different, it contradicts our civilization.

Inside Islam justice, religion, politics, law, human rights and compassion do not mean what they mean to us. All of these ideas are based on the principles of submission and duality as found in the Sharia.

OUR CIVILIZATION

Our civilization is based on the principles of the Golden Rule and critical thought. We do not always fulfill the principles, but they are the ideals we strive for, and can be used for debate and self-criticism to correct and improve our culture.

Our principles lead to the ideals of critical thought, self-criticism, equality of all peoples before the law, freedom of thought and ideas, freedom of religion, public debate, separation of church and state, liberal democracy and a free-ranging humor.

These are beautiful ideals and they are worth keeping and striving towards. Do we meet them? No, but what is more important they contradict the Sharia. It is one thing to fail to achieve these ideals, but it is entirely another to see them disappear as a public option under the impact of Sharia. Sharia law limits critical thought, self-criticism, equality of all peoples before the law, freedom of thought and ideas, freedom of religion, public debate, separation of church and state, liberal democracy and humor.

CIVILIZATIONAL WAR

Part of the genius of Islam is the totality of Sharia, which includes a concept of war that attacks the host civilization at every aspect of its being. In modern times the military power of Islam is weak, but this is more than compensated by its ability to attack along legal and cultural lines under the guise of being a religion.

As Sharia is applied to a society, the host civilization is annihilated in each and every manifestation of culture. This annihilation is demonstrated by a peculiar fact about the history of Islamic countries-part of it is missing. Afghanistan used to be a Buddhist civilization. We see its remnants in ruins and fragments such as the Bamiyan Buddhas that were destroyed by the Taliban. Who knows the Buddhist history of Afghanistan? Practically speaking, it does not exist. Who knows the history of how Turkey, North Africa, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq went from being Christian to Islamic?

We don’t know the history because of the total annihilation of the past cultures by Sharia law. As time goes on customs, law, art, literature, and ethics of the host culture are replaced by Islamic values under the application of Sharia. The result is that there is nothing left of the history before the implementation of Sharia law.

There is a second aspect of this annihilation-the dhimmitude of the Kafirs (non-Muslims) remaining inside Islamic society. If you talk to Christians who are left in Islamic countries, they are an abused people who are unable to fight back after centuries of suffering and degradation under Sharia law. They are not supported by other Kafirs and are left to suffer under the oppression that will eliminate their few numbers. Whatever memory they have of the past is ignored by those who should be defending them.

If we are to go down the Sharia road, history teaches that it has always led to an Islamic mono-culture. In the end, there is no such thing as a little Sharia.

Posted at American Thinker, August 19, 2010

Bill Warner,
Director, Center for the Study of Political Islam
Permalink
Copyright © 2010 CBSX, LLC
politicalislam.com Use and distribute as you wish; do not edit and give us credit.

By Bill Warner

Slavery still stalks the American consciousness, its wounds yetfestering in many hearts. If Barack Obama were to set his mind to it,he could heal much of the damage this peculiar institution wrought onour national soul. This great and tragic error that must be givenjustice. Obama is the best person in the world who can recognize,remember and honor the deaths of 125 million and the enslavement oftens of millions of people.

Hisunique qualifications can be found in his names. Until he was 20 yearsold, he went by the first name Barry. Then he decided to be calledBarack Hussein Obama, his original birth name.

Many people seem to the names “Barack” and “Obama” are African names. They are not.

Baraq[Barack] was the name of the winged horse-like creature that tookMohammed to Paradise in the Night Journey. Baraq can also mean God’sblessing. Hussein reminds some Americans ofSaddam Hussein, and Obama’s supporters get upset if it is used. Husseinwas the name of Mohammed’s grandson. So Obama’s entire name is basedupon Islamic mythology and African conquest. Barack Hussein Obama means[Allah’s blessing] [Mohammed’s grandson] .

Obama’s name reveals a part of history thatis unknown or hidden about America, Africa and slavery. It also revealsa history of the destruction of native African civilization. His namecame from his father, a so-called Arab African. The word Arab is theclue to the hidden history.

Kafirs (non-Muslims) rarelyrefer to Islam, but call it by an ethnic name whenever they can. WhenIslam conquered the Middle East, the conquerors were not calledMuslims, but Arabs. In Eastern Europe the Muslim invaders were calledTurks. In Spain conquering Muslims were referred to as Moors. Thus itis that the Islamic culture in Africa, Arab African, is referred towith an ethnic name, Arab Africans, like Obama’s father, are Muslimswho leave behind their African culture and adopt the Arab culture.

TheArab African Muslim has always been associated with slavery becauseIslam is the driving force in the history of world slavery.

Islam’sconnection with slavery starts with Mohammed. The exact details of howslaves are taken are described in detail in the Sira, Mohammed’sbiography. The Sira is a sacred text since it relates Mohammed’s wordsand deeds, called the Sunna. Everything he did is the perfect patternof behavior for all Muslims.

Mohammed was involved inevery single aspect and detail of slavery. He bought and sold slavesboth retail and wholesale. He gave them as gifts, used them for sex,received them as gifts, stood by as slaves were beaten, attacked. Heenslaved tribes, and owned black slaves. Indeed, his rise to politicalsuccess was financed, in part, by the profit of his slave trade.

Sothe sacred pattern of Mohammed and Islam is the enslavement ofnon-Muslims, kafirs. For 1400 years Islam has enslaved all races andcultures including Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians,animists, and atheists. Only Muslims are free of being enslaved.

What Obama could do

Obamacould tell us that there is only one way to understand Africa andslavery and that is to understand political Islam. For 1400 years Islamhas steadily been at work in Africa. The easiest place for Americans tosee Islam’s annihilation of kafir civilization is in North Africa andEgypt. Egypt used to be a Christian and Coptic (the descendants of thePharaohs) country. North Africa was a Greek and Christian culture, andat one time a part of the Roman Empire.

The first Islamicassault on African culture was the jihad that annihilated CopticEgyptian culture and Greek culture in Northern Africa. Today theseareas are Arabic and Islamic.

That was just the thinend of the jihad wedge. Over the next 1400 years, Islam tookapproximately 25 million slaves out of Africa. An Arabic word forAfrican is abd, the same word that is used for black slave. Arabic has about 40 words for slaves. White slaves are mamluk.Islam took more than a million European slaves into slavery. Thehighest priced slave in the Meccan slave market was a white woman.

Thereis great deal of collateral damage when a slave is taken. A warringparty attacks a tribe and when enough of the protectors are killed, therest will surrender and become slaves. All of those who were strongenough to work were taken away in a forced march for days. But thereare many who are left behind — the young, the old, and the sick andinjured.

Estimates vary, but from 5 to 10 people leftbehind died as the result of taking one slave. So for 25 millionslaves, we have the deaths of 125 million Africans over a 1400-yearperiod.

When the story of slavery is told in America, as in the movie Roots, the sailors get off the boats and capture the Africans and make them slaves. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Whenthe white slaver showed up in his wooden ship, he made a business dealwith a Muslim wholesaler. Jihad was the machinery that Mohammed used,and his model worked well in Africa as slavers filled the slave pensfor the same reason that Mohammed did it: profit. Whites only tradedslaves with Islam for about 200 years. Islam was in the slave tradebefore and after selling to the West.

If you would liketo learn about the Arab African slave traders that came from the samearea of Africa that Obama’s father came from, read Tippu Tip and the East African Slave Trade(Leda Farrant, Northumberland Press, 1975). Tippu Tip looked African,but he was 100% Arab and Muslim. By the way, Arab is not a racial term,but a cultural/language term.

But the slave trade hadanother effect. Africa slowly became Islamic. Jihad worked in many waysto bring about conversion. Sometimes trade introduced Islam and ahybrid Islam/native African religion evolved. Then jihad was used topurify and remove the African culture to result in a purer Islam. Butin the end, half of Africa fell to Islam.

The oddestthing is that many people have the idea that an Arab African is thesame as African. When the Arab culture replaces the native Africanculture the culture is not African. African culture is no more Arabthan Hindu culture is Arab. Sharia law is just as foreign to nativeAfrican culture as it is to ours.

The magnitude of thisproblem is seen in Darfur, where Arab Africans are destroying Africanswho are not yet Arab enough. This is a centuries-long jihad toannihilate the native African culture. This process is no differentthan the process by which Coptic Egypt became Arab Egypt. Islam is nota religion but a complete civilization whose stated goal is to replaceall other civilizations. There has never been a historical example of acountry that kept its native culture after Islam entered. So Africa isan ordinary historical example.

The ignorance about thehistory behind Obama’s names is the root of why he can achieve such animpact. Obama represents the chance to help heal the curse of slaveryin America by revealing its complete history. He is a descendant of awhite woman who had slave owners in her ancestry. His African fatherdescended from those who enslaved the Africans. Obama is descended fromslave owners and slave traders, but he does not have a single drop ofslave blood in him.

Since race trumps all, everyone seeshim as being representative of America’s slave descendants. It becomestrue simply because in a race/culture-obsessed society, some want it tobe true. Obama’s slave ancestry is a fiction and not reality.

SoObama is half enslaver, by ancestry, and half slave, by choice. He isthe most uniquely positioned to tell the truth, the complete truthabout Islam, Africa, America and slavery.

Now here isthe last little twist to Obama’s name. He called himself Barry, anIrish name, for many years in America. He changed what he wanted to becalled after he went to Pakistan for a three-week stay. He left Americaas Barry and returned as Barack.

Some whites may havebought slaves from Islam for 200 years, but after that, their culturewas first to outlaw slavery. So Obama changed his name from a culturethat abolished slavery to a name from a culture that has enslavedothers for 1400 years and has a highly detailed doctrine of slavery.

Thisis the world that Obama spans: from slavery abolition to the eternalenslaver. He represents hope to many American descendants of slaves,but his ancestors were never enslaved. No one else could tell the storythat Obama knows. He could tell the story of how 125 million Africansdied. He could tell the story of how 25 million Africans became slaves.

There is an enormous irony that descendants of the slaves that hisancestors created now look to him for justice. And he could give themreal justice by telling the complete truth of their enslavement. Onlyhe has the power to make others listen.

Obama has declared himself to be a world citizen with his speech in Berlin, and hisspeaking the truth of the complete story of slavery would be historic,and could reverse centuries of ignorance and lies. He can stand up andtell the world the true complete story of slavery. It would changehistory far beyond the election cycle.

Bill Warner is director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam.

Page Printed from: American Thinker