Islam Is Islamism, And Oil Is Its Modern Prophet!

Judaism, Christianism, Islamism: Ordered By Increasing Enslavement And Violence

Abstract And Significance: Plutocrats, those who exert the power of wealth and evil, always rule sustainably through a cult. The basic methodology of crafty, sustainable class abuse is to deny not just human dignity, but respect for reason itself. So the oppressive cults tend to be violent and really stupid, by design (an example is Putinism).

Violent and really stupid, such as brandishing somebody crucified, one of the worst tortures ever devised… in the name of love and safety (this is what Christianism, does, to be clear). Christianism has been thoroughly dismissed in the advanced circles of thought… However, the plutocrats found a loophole. Christianism is now progressively replaced by a cult of mythical Islam, all good and glorious, or so the upper ones say (they use a so-called “Glorious Qur’an” which omits ALL the bad stuff from the REAL Qur’an). Although Islam adopted the symbol of the Moon from old Byzanthium, Islam is even more violent and discriminatory than Christianism and more of an insult to reason and dignity… And Christianism put the bar real high… The reason, as usual, is local plutocratic control, aggravated by the global need for oil.

Real intellectuals who want the Islamized areas to progress, be it only in the name of planetary security will point out that Islam needs to be restrained, just as Christianism was. The fanatics of the first Crusades are the brothers of Islamist Brotherhood, and for the same reason: violence in the name of a violent god (it’s the same god!) is no violence… in fanatical eyes.

So-called Islamists practicing Islamism are the true Muslims: they do according to the Qur’an, which informs us that Jews descend from apes and pigs [1]. Although Christianism, one could argue, was perverted by the Roman emperors which reconstructed it their brutal, self-serving way over three centuries, Islam was born that way, as an imperial ideology: Muhammad led an attack against the Roman empire. His friend and successor Abu Bakr ruled for only two years and two months, but thoroughly defeated both Romans and Persians…  

***  

Christianism, the religion of turning the other cheek, so one can get more of a concussion, is a slave religion imposed by latter day saints and emperors. It’s not obsolete in the sense that it gave birth to Islam, a superstition imposed by present day emperors. 

Christianism was a lie and a manipulation by the inherited plutocracy during the 16 centuries during which it dominated Europe. Something similar is affecting the area, with more than a billion people, where Islam dominates presently… And much of the exploitation actually comes from the same sort of plutocracy which terrorized and abused Europe during the Middle Ages. First let’s recapitulate the Christian situation, as Christianism was the forerunner and even promoter of early Islam.

Starting in December 380, Roman emperor Theodosius I invented the concept of heresy, a form of madness, he declares in his decrees, passible of any punishment. Theodosius said that the (Roman imperial) authorities could administer any punishment, including expropriation and death from horrendous tortures. 

When it surfaced that this so-called “Catholic Orthodoxy” was mostly an instrument of plutocrats to impose their rule of terror, revolutions and reforms were attempted, starting in the Tenth Century. The struggle against the terror church became more determined immediately after the crimes of the first crusade came to light… in the Twelfth Century.. However, thanks to Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, himself a plutocrat by inheritance and de facto leader of the Catholic church, and in spite of ferocious resistance by the philosopher Abelard and his powerful network of influencers, a second crusade was launched, and then many others… 

The struggle between reformers and the Catholic church turned into a succession of religious wars, crusades, genocides and massacres, all the way to the eighteenth century. Most notable was the annihilation of all the Cathars, five millions of them, and all their books and thoughts.

By the time of Henry VIII and even more so of the French revolution, it became clear to intellectuals that the progress of civilization demanded the extinction of the Christian church’s hold on the minds of the rabble (evolution couldn’t be taught in England until Darwin, because of the Church). That was implemented the hard way in France, where many priests were executed.

The Christian mindset made a last victim, one it had wished to do for a very long time, European Jewry… Luther hated Jews in a lethal fashion, and wrote an entire book glorifying his murderous hate. Judaism, the original form of Christianism, was Europe’s oldest surviving religion, and fell prey to the Nazis… Just because Catholicism always wanted to get rid of Judaism, but was held back at the last moment by secular authorities… When the latter became Nazi, there was no holding back. . 

***

After the French and a century later, the Brits ejected the Ottomans from their occupation of North Africa and the Middle East, Arab regimes imitated their protectors and turned secular and progressive. That was called the Nahda… the Renaissance. It lasted from the beginning of the 19th until the mid twentieth century. What caused it? Well the US, France and the UK intervened. The US to recover hostages, launching the US Marines by so doing, then Napoleon tried to emulate Alexander the Great, but was sabotaged by the UK, yet freed Egypt, and finally France conquered Algeria, a den of pirates, at least in Algiers,, arguing that it owned it all along as the successor state of Rome. By the 1930s, Egyptian women in bathing suits were a common sight. But then Islamism returned.

What happened? I have argued that oil happened. As soon as the early 1920s, Ibn Saud, by then king of Saudi Arabia, which he had conquered from the Ottomans and thanks to an alliance with Muslim Fundamentalists, an old family tradition… Ibn Saud got rid of his ardent Jihadists by revealing to the Brits their incoming attack on Jerusalem… The UK massacred them. By the 1930s, US oil men showed up, and by 1945, a deal Ibn Saud couldn’t refuse was made with the dying FDR….In a few days of military communion on the Great Bitter Lake… Give us your oil, recycle your money on Wall Street, and we will condone your religious style dictatorship… That enabled the Muslim Brotherhood, more or less founded by the Nazis, to survive and prosper…In symbiosis with the Great Bitter Lake scheme. Modern Islamism prevented the rise of modern states in North Africa and the Middle East. That was not an accident but the reason why it was activated. 

Isphahan. The main square of Isphahan is one of the world’s most beautiful places. It’s gigantic and full of fabulous mosques, I was there, and it should never be bombed, being one of the world’s greatest art extravaganza.

***

***

***

Razika Adnani is a woman which is a formal education in philosophy of Franco-Algerian nationality who specialize in Islam. She gave a long interview in the Figaro, much of it specific with Algeria and France. Here is the conclusion in a more general vein:

Why do today’s Muslim youth seem more radical than previous generations? How do we explain it?

It is certain that we are witnessing a rise in conservatism and radicalism among young Muslims in the West. This is a continuation of what happened in Muslim countries. This is explained by the fact that we are moving further and further away from the fabulous period called the nahda (often translated as rebirth), which took place in the Muslim world between the beginning of the 19th century and the mid-20th century.

The nahda is a movement of major reforms and a process of modernization which affected all areas including that of religion. Under pressure from conservatives and Islamists who knew how to take advantage of the political and geopolitical events of the time, the nahda failed.

[Patrice Ayme’s thesis is that this failure was not an accident, just as the promotion of Christianism by Roman emperors in the Fourth Century, which was a sinister plot at the highest level, starting with son killing and wife steaming Constantine.]

Conservatives and Islamists, notably the Wahhabis and Muslim Brotherhood, then mobilized to ensure that Muslim societies renounce the gains of this period of modernization, that is to say, go back to the past. , which they gradually achieved. As a result, the more the years separate us from the period of the nahda, the more conservatism and Islamism are expressed and imposed, and the more young people are more religious and conservative than their elders.

How can we fight against the radical ideas shared by young Muslims, which take shape thanks to disinformation and social networks?

The fight must take place on several levels. First of all, that of the State which must be firmer and more determined in its fight against Islamic radicalism to stop the Islamist ideology which is on the march in France. The State must find a solution to this phenomenon of indoctrination by social networks. It cannot fight against fundamentalism and Islamism and leave young people at the mercy of social networks.

It must act at school level by providing training to teachers, enabling them to have intellectual elements of defense against fundamentalist discourse among young people. I myself was a teacher in Algeria at a time when the Islamist wave was invading the country. It was only with these elements of defense that I was able to face the fundamentalism that was affecting certain students. To instill the values of humanism and critical thinking in young people, teachers must stop wanting to spare the sensitivity of Muslims, which is on the one hand discrimination and on the other hand does not help them to emancipate themselves. intellectually.

Then, we must put an end to the idea that “Islamism is not Islam”, which specialists in Islamism like to repeat since the 1970s. It has created the nest of conservatism and radicalism in sheltering Islam from any criticism. This has prevented Muslims from critically looking at their religion and religious discourse. On the contrary, this expression has reassured them in their certainties and their practices which date back to the first centuries of Islam and which are not in agreement with the values of our time and with the culture of France.

Finally, religious discourse must be honest with Muslims and non-Muslims, that is to say, we must put an end to the phrase: “It is not Islam but only Muslims” . A phrase which is itself at the origin of the academics’ phrase: “It is not Islam, but Islamism”. Muslim intellectuals or intellectuals of Muslim culture must get to work to offer Muslims a new Islam, compatible with the values of humanism and the modalities of social and political organization of our time by explaining to them why it is necessary to change and how it is possible to change. Without this work within Islam, without this reform of Islam, radicalism and Islamism will continue to advance. Whatever political measures are taken against these phenomena, they will resurface as long as Islam does not change from within.

How did supporters of political Islam in France manage to impose the concept of “Islamophobia”?

[Patrice Ayme: In many countries including supposedly religiously enlightened France, “Islamophobia”, the JUSTIFIED fear of Islam, is mistranslated into the “hate of Islam”, and viewed as a form of… racism. Whereas, in truth, any religion which threatens to kill people for innocent beliefs and practices, calling them criminal, should be feared, and as the Republican Romans did, extinguished.] 

Islamophobia is a concept that aims to prevent thoughts from being expressed. It is therefore added to the list of concepts and theories that Muslim fundamentalists and literalists put in place, between the 8th century and the 10th century, to block thought and reason and prevent them from expressing themselves. in the field of religion. Among these theories are that of the uncreated Quran, the theory of salaf (or predecessor), the theory of naql (or literalism) and among the concepts there is that which states that “religion is a matter of the heart and not of reason”. Islamophobia therefore easily finds its place in the consciousness of a large part of Muslims who think that Islam, the perfect religion of God transmitted by the predecessors who have held the absolute truth, cannot be criticized.

The Muslim Brotherhood used it in the Muslim world as a weapon against progressives who had a different narrative about the Muslim religion, and in the West to make Muslims feel like victims because criticism about their religion is issued. The idea that Islam does not admit any critical spirit is also nourished by academics, who have repeated for more than 50 years that Islam is not responsible for the problems that arise, but only Islamism which is not Islam.

We therefore reinforced this conviction which existed among a large proportion of Muslims from cultures where Islam is not criticized. For them, anyone who criticizes it has no reason to do so other than out of fear or hatred of this religion. They perceive this as an injustice towards them. Prohibiting critical thinking in the field of Islam is obviously not in the interest of Islam or Muslims.

***

***

[1]

Quran in Surah Al Ma’idah that says:

“Say, “Shall I inform you of [what is] worse than that as penalty from Allah ? [It is that of] those whom Allah has cursed and with whom He became angry and made of them apes and pigs (swine) and slaves of Taghut. Those are worse in position and further astray from the sound way.””  

No Genocide In Gaza. Just A Miscomputation Of Jewish Haters

Hamas attacked in a spirit of genocide, fully counting upon the islamophilic woke self-haters to come to their rescue. Hamas didn’t anticipate that Israel anticipated that Hamas, which says in its constitution that Jews have to be killed, had itself anticipated Hamas’ anticipation. Also, considering 3,000 years of genocides and anti-Judaism, Western leaders have become familiar with the startegy of killing Jews under the excuse that Jews are killers. In just war, it matters who killed first.

Genocide is what happened to Native Tasmanians. And it happened to many American tribes. Genocide is most common in history, it’s an engine: get smarter quick, or get annihilated. 

Genocide is when an entire genetically identifiable, or culturally distinct group is made to disappear by human will (UN definition). It’s not happening to Palestinians: looking at the five year moving average, there are more Palestinians than ever. Nobody has a plan to exterminate the Palestinians… Whereas the Hamas constitution trotted out sacred Hadiths from the highest authorities of Islam who claimed that all Jews will have to be killed (see essay on the Hamas constitution and the Hadiths).So Hamas intended genocide of the Jews, a most significant notion. Those supporting Hamas then support genocide.

The problem with Palestine is that, instead of seeing the return to its homeland of a Jewish state as an asset, influencers and leaders have tried, not too well, to extirpate that small Jewish state. 

The October 7 2023 attack, by displaying maximal hate, was supposed to instill in Jews the morbid feeling that, if there was such hate against them, they deserved it, and should submit… Something the Jews were forced to do for more than 18 centuries, in most places. 

However the more one attacks unjustly a tribe, threatening its existence, the more it will expand in defense…. If it is allowed to have an armed defense. This is how Rome grew, with a succession of mostly defensive wars for the first seven centuries of its existence. 

For 18 centuries, Jews were denied an official defense, that is an army and a state. Now they have them. So attacks against Israel will, as they should, lead to an expansion of Israel. For example if attacks on Northern Israel keep on coming from Lebanon, making Northern Israel unlivable, as is presently the case, one should not be surprised if Israel annexes part of Lebanon as a security zone.

More than half of Israel’s population consists of descendants of Jews who lived oppressed or victimized lives in Muslim countries. More than 12 centuries ago, the same places were full of Jews and Christians, ruled over by a war-like small Muslim minority armed to the teeth, legally and physically.

Israel was canceled as a state in 136 CE by fascist in chief Hadrian; Jews were also banished from Jerusalem by the “Little Greek”, the Graeculus, the unhinged boy lover in chief. Jerusalem had been Israel’s capital for more than a millennium… Longer than Rome had existed by several centuries. 

Both decrees from an enraged, suffering and dying Hadrian, were in blatant violation of the Roman constitution… as emperor Julian pointed out in the 360s (the Roman constitution concerning just war was viewed as a set of laws given by the Gods; Julius Caesar had to cross the Rubicon with a legion because he was unjustly charged by Cato the Younger, a fanatical hater, with having violated these laws in Gaul..) 

Julian’s untimely death, and an earthquake blocked the regrowth of Israel at the time (363 CE). Following Julian’s demise, the Christian killers rose in their absolute fury, keen to extinguish civilization if need be, so that they could stay in power. Theodosius I passed his heresy terror decrees in 380-381 CE. The gist of them was that Roman emperors could legally torture to death anyone they accused to have left their interpretation of Abrahamism. By 395 CE, the Roman imperial state had started its final collapse. A century later, it had been replaced by its successor state, the Franks, in the West. The Franks defanged Catholicism, civilizing it with mandatory secular universal education, and tolerance for tolerable non-Catholics (including Pagans, Jews and even Muslims). However, when the unjust, perceived as unjust feudal system reared its ugly plutocratic head, the thugs who called themselves noble weaponized again Catholicism in their service, and Jews were again oppressed… when not outright expelled (that was tried out of France and England, 13C, not too well, and accomplished in Spain, 1492 CE).

After being occupied by the giant Roman empire, Israel was occupied by the even larger Caliphates, terrorized by the counter-attacking Crusaders, and then oppressed by the giant Ottoman Muslim empire. So there was no occasion for Israel to rise again: the struggle of the Greeks against the Turks lasted three centuries, and the Greeks had international help. Finally, the Ottomans were kicked out from choosing the wrong side in WW1. The UK made a half baked effort to prevent the rebirth of Israel.   

As the present United Nations is a direct legal descendant of Rome …through the Imperium Francorum (486-800 CE), then the Renovatio Imperium Romanum (800 CE and thereafter), and Europe… it was constitutional to re-establish the rights of the Jews, unjustly dispossessed of their land, their state, and continually threatened with extinction by unhinged Roman Catholic authorities. Being deprived of their state brought genocide attempts against the Jews which were mostly successful, as, overall.

The confrontation against Israel is mostly a made-up conflict, initially intended as a distraction by the local potentates… and still functioning as such. If Palestinians had embraced Israel long ago, they would be doing much better. They can still do that… Because clearly the two state solution, with two armies, will never work… Although it makes now for a vigorous war, it’s no sustainable solution… 

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/…/fateful-hadiths…

Two administrations, sure. Two police forces, sure. But just one army, Tsahal, the Israeli Defense Force…

Palestinians will get out of this once they understand that Israel is an asset they can own: kill them with love and cooperation, not missiles and genocidal threats….

Only God can determine for sure what value and worth are, or, at least, so people long thought. However Judeo-Christo-Islamist God was obviously invented by savages roaming the Fertile Crescent or maybe Egypt too.

So back to guesswork. And cosmology is coming to our rescue. Everything indicates we are the only civilization in the observed universe, hence well worth dying for! Mission civilisatrice just getting started!

Patrice Ayme

Detail of the base of the Arch of emperor Titus (inaugurated 81 CE), Rome. Roman soldiers are stealing artifacts from the Jewish temple in Jerusalem, which they destroyed, leaving only its base. On that base, the Roman Catholics built churches. Four centuries later, the Muslims built major mosques… on said Jewish temple. What the Catholics and Muslims were saying with their sacred monuments on top of the heart of Judaism’s most sacred place was that Judaism had been completely defeated, and laid under foot of Christo-Islamism.

Fateful Hadiths: “There Is A Jew… So Kill Him!”

One of the virtues of Islam is deliberate lying to non-Muslims (it’s prescribed!) So the sacred texts of Islam ordering to kill Jews, all Jews, or to commit genocide against various groups have been hiding in plain sight: it’s increasingly against the law, including French law, to just see such texts. This sort of Islamophilia works by declaring that telling the truth about the most basic texts of Islam exhibits “Islamophobia” (the fear of Islam)… which is viewed as racism… and racism is in turn equated to hate speech… punishable by law. (Will fearing the Catholic Inquisition be a hate crime too, very soon?)

We are all been Islamized one deranged, anti-civilizational judge’s order at a time! (French “judges” judged that quoting while praising Hadith ordering the genocide of Jews was not hate speech… Here I quote, but do not praise…)

Hate, terror, fear, torture, extermination are the great classics of human history. By applying terminal horror to creatures associated with Israel, even the not yet born, just because they were associated with Israel, Hamas sung the song of termination, familiar throughout human evolution.  Hamas wanted to imprint on the world that the way to deal with Jews was to instill in them the expectation of genocide.

Islam is at fault. Islam sacred texts are obsessed with Jews, as Islam is a reinterpretation of Jewish faith. The Hadiths about the necessity to kill all the Jews from top Caliphs, and Abi Huraira are extremely famous and known to all Muslim Fundamentalists. Similar Hadiths (kill all Jews) were uttered by Second Caliph Umar (no less!) and many others, sometimes in Hadiths up to several pages long, giving all the details! (Links are to standard Islam sites.)

There are thousands of Hadiths and Quran verses trashing the Jews; Jews spoil food, they are apes, pigs, etc…. But the order to kill the Jews so that the Final Judgment can proceed has got to be the ultimate… The order to kill all Jews was Article 7 of the 1988 Hamas Charter.

Here is an extract from PBS, the US national government public TV and radio (PBS is considered woke and left… in truth a creature of US corporations… which are pretending to be woke and left…), on the genocidal antijudaism in Arabia:

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/saudi/etc/textbooks.html

The incriminated Saudi books were published in 2000. PBS FRONTLINE cannot verify how many Saudi schools have used these textbooks, or how these passages were taught or interpreted by teachers in Saudi Arabia. However, these textbooks are part of the official curriculum for Saudi students and are a fundamental part of their education. Approximately 35% of school studies is devoted to compulsory Saudi religious education. (For more on Saudi religious education, see FRONTLINE’s interviews with Ali al-Ahmed, Mai Yamani, and Hassan Youssef Yassin.)

The Victory of Muslims over the Jews. This first extract, “The Victory of Muslims Over Jews,” is the last two pages from the prophet Mohammed’s sayings, HADITHS. Hadith narrated by Abi Huraira:

“The last hour won’t come before the Muslims would fight the Jews and the Muslims will kill them so Jews would hide behind rocks and trees. Then the rocks and tree would call: oh Muslim, oh servant of God! There is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only “Gharkad” tree, it is of Jews’ trees.”

Explanation of words. “Last Hour: the hereafter will not come. “Gharkad”: a big tree with thorns and the Jews grew it a lot in Palestine those days. Here are the Teachings of the Hadiths:

1/ It’s fate decided by Allah that the Muslims and Jews will fight till the end of the world.

2/ The Hadith predicts for the Muslims God’s victory over the Jews.

3/ The victory for the Muslims because they are right, and who ever is right is always victorious, even though most people are against him.

4/ God grants victory to the Muslims if they have a true will, if they unite, hold on to God’s sharia, if they go by God’s ruling, if they are patient.

5/ The material strength won’t be enough to warrant victory, it is necessary to invoke God and to seek his support.

6/ Whoever is with God, God is with him; no matter what hardships and ordeals one would undergo, what counts is the final result.

7/ Jews and Christians are the enemies of believers they will never approve of the Muslims, beware of them.

***

Muslims generally deny that Islam hates Jews, because they know hate looks bad and they want to look good… But those same Muslims typically refuse to consider the plethora of offensive sacred texts against Jews, in Quran and Hadith… and this shows they are not honest, or then so ignorant that there is something called “The Glorious Quran”, a text, a propaganda work, where all the toxic, lethal threats and horrific commands of the real Quran have been excised… And that apparently this “Glorious Quran” is the only book they have been exposed to… If one applied the same process to Nazi texts, to refuse to quote all offending Nazi texts, Nazism would come clean as a whistle.

In the case of Islam, so-called “Glorious Quran” edition do exactly that, removing and expunging all calls to apply torture in the name of Allah to… most of humanity (turns out)… 

***

In a spirit of respect to Muslims who are in denial that Islam preaches torture to death against many non-Muslims, here is an extract from WSJ of a British “Observant” Muslim Qanta A. Ahmed, a British-American physician who came to prominence as a doctor specializing in sleep disorders. She has also worked as an author and journalist and human right activist.

***

Muslim Qanta A. Ahmed, a British-American physician wrote: “The Scenes of Genocide I Saw in Israeli Morgues

This wasn’t an emotional frenzy of killing like the pogroms of the 1880s. It was methodically planned…

This is Israel. I arrived on Oct. 19 to spend 10 days as a human-rights observer with the permission of the nation’s Foreign Affairs Ministry and help from Israel Defense Forces officer Kobi Valer. As an observant Muslim, I felt a duty to come and bear witness. What I saw will remain with me forever.

Hamas waged its attacks in the nation’s south, but hundreds of its victims have since been moved north. I encountered many of them at the morgues at the Shura military base near Ramle, some 15 miles southeast of Tel Aviv. I toured the Sammy Ofer Fortified Underground Emergency Hospital in Haifa, visiting the neonatal units whose tiny patients had recently been relocated in anticipation of further conflict. I examined bodies and ashes, incinerated teeth and bones. I saw toddlers, teens and adults, young and old, many of them bound, tortured and burned alive.

One word continually came to mind: genocide. No matter how it emerges, the monster is easy to recognize. As a doctor, I had a rare and panoramic view of the aftermath: the targeted people’s long, agonizing journey to death.

This isn’t the first time I have seen Islamist jihadism or even Islamist genocide. I’ve been to northwestern Pakistan and met child Taliban operatives groomed for suicide missions. I still attend to 9/11 first-responders in New York. I’ve been to post-ISIS Iraq to meet with Kurdish and Yazidi survivors of genocide. I’ve spoken with former ISIS child soldiers and the Peshmerga veterans of that brutal and bloody three-year war.

The Oct. 7 genocide was different, more barbaric than anything before it. The attacks were cloaked in the language and metaphors of Islam, yet corrupted with cosmic enmity for the Jewish people, Judaism, global Jewry and the Jewish state. They revealed again that Islamism is a virulent impostor of Islam with intentions anathema to the faith. And there was no doubt of Islamism’s guilt: I saw real-time footage generated by the Hamas commandos’ own GoPro cameras. I heard phone calls exclaiming the Shahadah—the Islamic declaration of faith—as they murdered, executed, burned, pillaged and then broadcast their crimes.

There is a commonality I have found in the face of such destruction. People struggle to find the words to describe what happened. Israelis I met were still searching for how to recount their experiences. Some talked about a second Shoah, a second Holocaust. One Israeli detective disagreed: “We can’t call this a holocaust—not because of the numbers—but because the Nazis were systematic and institutionalized the killing, and we can’t call it carnage, because ‘carnage’ is too nice a word.” He looked at me with a painful gaze. I found my own words strangled in silence, except one: genocide.

Article 6 of the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines genocide as a crime against humanity in terms identical to the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Its essential element is intent “to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.”

The Oct. 7 attack was premeditated, organized and targeted, seeking to destroy as many Israelis as possible. Hamas tortured and immolated its victims, including children, pregnant women and the unborn. Its men intentionally captured hostages, around 240 in total, reportedly from more than 40 countries.

They had intent. Eyewitnesses told me the terrorists came with tablets loaded with maps of the kibbutzim, blueprints and floor plans of homes, names of families and specific knowledge of service records and where Israeli veterans were living. Others told me that some of the terrorists spoke Hebrew and lured the unwitting out of their safe rooms into certain death.

This wasn’t like the pogroms of the 1880s, a frenzy of killing with rabid emotion. This was a methodically planned genocide. No such circumstances apply to Israel’s operation in Gaza, and so the description must not be the same. The sovereign state of Israel is destroying Hamas because Hamas is threatening Israel, which is working to mitigate civilian losses. The country has a duty to prevent further genocide against its people. Saying so doesn’t detract from the suffering of Palestinians who are captives of Hamas.

Two weeks after the attack, Queen Rania of Jordan suggested that the butchering of children had yet to be “independently verified” as I examined images of their remains in Ramle. The deceit felt as barbaric as the atrocities. There is no context, no nuance, that justifies genocide. Its intention is the same throughout the ages: the destruction of a people.

Israel, the West and the Muslim world must respond with necessary moral clarity: Define the Oct. 7 attacks as genocide. Legally designating the horrors as such ought to become a priority, independent of the war against Hamas, because the attacks need to be documented and prosecuted as crimes against humanity. Doing so is a matter of Jewish survival. The world has been silent in the face of Jewish genocide before. When we now say never again, we must mean it.

Dr. Ahmed is a physician who specializes in sleep disorders and a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum.“

When as towering a personage as Umar, the Second Caliph of Islam, top companion and general of Muhammad, promotes the killing of Jews one cannot say such will to kill is caused by rogue Islamists. Umar overviewed the invasion of Jerusalem and then Egypt. The Catholic Patriarch in Jerusalem invited Umar to come and pray in the Catholic church on the top of the Temple of the Jews. Umar declined the invitation, because, he said, if it did so, the Muslims (his followers!) would turn the Church into a mosque. So he prayed outside, where now the famous and beautiful gold dome mosque stands. Roman Catholics and Islamists both disliked the Jews… And for the same fundamental reason: they had stolen their religions from the Jews, and thus had to justify that by saying Jews and their religion were bad.

Much has been made of the “tolerance” of Muslims for Jews (and Christians). But for centuries Arab and Iranian military aristocracies ruled over giant Judeo-Christian populations, which they needed to serve them. But they were cruelly oppressed in all sorts of ways… some lethal… to prevent rebellion… As happened in Spain (but the Franks started the liberation of Spain… Including Catalonia, Aragon, etc,,,)

Well, to recapitulate, Ahmed, perhaps having been fed a diet of “Glorious Quran”, you may not realize it, but the Hamas torturers applied literally what is in Fundamental Muslim texts… Dr. Ahmed, with all due respect, and maybe you have to say it as an anti-Islam Fifth Columnist, you are deluded and in denial: there is no difference between “Islamism” and Islam, not anymore than there would be between Christianism and Christ.

There are easily more than 100 sects of Islam. Some are compatible with civilization, but strict interpretations of sacred texts where they are the most extreme is NOT compatible with civilization. However the extremes won.

Patrice Ayme

Good Fundamental Muslims are immersed in a bath of Jewish hate; once again, this is standard fare; authors of hate for Jews are Muhammad (so-called Messenger of the fascist in heavens), Bakr (Muhammad’s father in law and first Caliph), Umar (companion of Muhammad, second Caliph, and enemy of Aisha about sexism; Aisha was Muhammad’s child bride, they married when she was six (6), and his second wife, daughter of Bakr) etc. :

Criticizing Christianism Helped Civilization. Not To Criticize Islam Does Not.

The Iranian theocracy killed at least 50 children during a few weeks of Fall 2022. Nearly three centuries ago, one could play “Le Fanaticisme Ou Mahomet Le Prophete, Tragedie par Voltaire”. Both facts, killing children for religious reasons, and censoring critique of religion, are related; I didn’t invent the argument, it is found explicitly in Voltaire complaining, for example, about children burned alive by Catholic authorities just because those children were born Jewish. 

NYT refuses to print possible deepest explanations of why children are been killed in Iran, and censors even milder observations which Voltaire made, three centuries ago:

The New York Times, famous for (mostly) NOT talking about the Holocaust of the Jews during WWII (and now claiming to be “haunted” by how badly, that is, pro-Nazi, the NYT behaved then), censored all my comments on why the theocratic regimes in Iran kills children. The NYT’s basic position is that believing that the interpretation of Islam in  power in Iran is to blame should be censored. Instead it nebulously criticizes the “regime” in power. It does not dawn on the NYT, that this “regime” is called Shia Islam. The regime is Islam. The regime is not secular law, the roots of which are at least 27 centuries old (Rome) or even a thousand years older than that (Babylon).

This way, the NYT can present as an outrage the fact children are being killed, while making sure children keep getting killed.

Please find below a collage of various comments I sent to the NYT. All my comments which could be seen as crticial of Islam were censored. Remarkably, of hundreds of comments critical of the killing of children in Iran, not one was critical of Islam. So no mentally debilitating system of thought affecting the Middle East was injured by the NYT. 

***   

NOT to criticize Islam is racist, and malevolent:

The concept of “secular” comes from “seculum”, a period of 120 years. Secularism is the religion of living in one’s own time, with relevant technology and problems.  Being tied up again (re-ligare) by what makes sense today.

The attitude of making the critique of Islam into a death sentence is in the Quran, all over the Quran. The penalty is death and eternal torture.

Allah says: “They who disbelieve and deny Our revelations, such are rightful owners of Hell. –(Quran, S 5; v.11; then Allah repeats that same message again and again and again, throughout His Quran, varying a word here or there; for example: “But those who disbelieve and deny Our revelations, they are owners of hell-fire.” (S.5; v.86)).

Accordingly, the QURANIC “REVELATION” KEPT REASON IN BONDAGE. At that point weaklings who hate civilization always whine that I should talk about Christianism and its horrors. Right:

***

Europe Was Built With And Against Catholicism:

Much of what came to be know as Christianism, was from a humanitarian movement lauched centuries before Christianism. There were social services in Rome, and alms to the poor on massive government level. Christianism adopted those as if it had invented them, but it didn’t.

What was uniquely Christian was the terror launched by Theodosius I, Roman emperor and theocratic tyrant, around 380 CE, calling “heretics” all those he wanted to attack and destroy. Thus, of course, Christianism, known at the time as “Universal Common Opinion” (“Orthodox Catholicism” in Greek) was accused. As deserved. Eugenius, a school principal, supported by the Senate of the city of Rome,  allied to the Frank Arbogast, Commander in Chief of the (Western) Roman army tried to stop Theodosius (and his Goths!) Eugenius and Arbogast died from it. And the Western empire collapsed.

However, a century later, Clovis, elected King of the Franks and Roman Imperator (in the technical sense) and Consul, adopted a more subtle approach. Clovis forced Catholicism into a more civilized form by… adopting it (and educating it, to the impotent rage of some Popes).

That more civilized form of Catholiscism, open to Judaism and even Islam,  lasted five centuries, until 1026 CE exactly, when heretic burning was relaunched… Then Christianism was resisted tooth and nail, by a whole panoply of European thinkers such as Abelard (12C). That resistance took many forms, including creating religiously independent universities… The Fourteenth Century’s most important thinker, Buridan, who discovered most of Newton’s laws, refused to get a religious degree, and still rose to the top of the top university, and advised four kings (also slept with a queen, at least, so it was said at the time…) This is indicative of how little respect the church was getting. In the fifteenth century, not content with putting senior churchmen in cages, king Louis XI of France would send the army to protect Protestants against Catholics (yes, that was before Luther was born). A testimony to tolerance: imagine an Islamist chieftain sending armies to protect unbelievers…

The anti-Christian movement was immensely powerful in Europe. As Nietsche pointed out, Christianism, a perfect slave religion, was used mostly as a way to keep the peasants in place, and many among the peasants knew it, so they revolted, and were exterminated (10C). A steady state of repression was thereafter imposed with steady state reverence for Christianism, an exact parallel, for the present day oil and gas plutocracy all over the world. To get into the real mood of the oppressed in the Middle Ages, one just has to read the 150 remaining Fabliaux, where lecherous priests, the basest individuals imaginable, preaching religion while doing the opposite, are ridiculized while being tortured to death, as justly deserved. The earliest fabliaux are from 1150 CE. In an early one, the priest who slept with the wife pretends to be Jesus, striking the sanctimonious pose of the martyr on the cross, so the husband nails him, before slicing off his endowment…

Europe became Europe, because superstitious religion was kept under foot, and under secular law, once the Franks had got rid of the Roman Catholic state (which they were supposed to defend, and ended up defending against…). 

Tellingly, the word “Europe ” in the modern sense, was introduced by the Franks, during the invasion of Europe by the Muslims in the early Eighth Century. The armies resisting the Muslim invaders were called “European” by Eighth century Franks (Franks were squabbling among themselves… to put it midly… but recognized they shared common values that Muslim invaders were deprived of. Later, under Charlemagne, though, accomodations were found with Muslim rulers of Spain, as those had veered towards civilization too…)

Calling Europe “Christian” in the early Middle Ages was a joke and a (serious) coverup of what was really going on (for the real lion mentality ruled de facto, as Friedrich Nietzsche insisted correctly). European civilization, even around 700 CE, was highly diverse, and there was no attempt to impose a monolithic way of thinking (except in parts the Franks were actively conquering). Islam was the exact opposite: 

***

Islam wants to be superstition, religion, revelation, civilization, system of government, law and justice:

All the Muslim philosophers who suggested to put reason first fell under Islamic terror. The Islamic dictators kept a wide berth from any overly critical Greek philosophy. Even Plato and Socrates were too much for them. Aristotle was better, since he was a collaborator of tyrants, thus Aristotlian writings survived well under Islam. 

The most famous Muslim philosopher, “Averroes”was stoned to death in 1198 CE, by a mob of Muslims in Morocco because Muslim scripture says to kill people who may think differently on esoteric subjects. This leads straight to killing children in the streets of Tehran in 2022.

The third successor of Mahomet was killed in a coup against the Qur’an he had dictated, because of this Quran he had dictated, boiling all the alternative Qurans, and that Uthman Quran is the Quran we have now, and we are supposed to respect as if it were god itself. But in 650s, the closest companions and relatives of mahomet fought against it. To death. In huge battles, such as the Battle of the Camel, led against the Quran we have now, by Muhammad’s most loved and devoted third wife, the young Aisha. In truth, this Quran is much too much Uthman’s elucubrations. Muhammad was more broad minded. After all, in the Quran, Allah admits:  religions are “mere fables of old men“.

***

Fighting for Iranian Freedom is fighting against Islam:

Good luck to Iranian youth, it will need it, because tyrannies are often successful when they cling to power, not hesitating to kill children.

The region under the spell of Islam was, for millennia, the world’s wealthiest, and much civilization originated there. Time and time again, tyrannical regimes have used Islam as a cover for oppression. This didn’t happen in the West because of the separation of church and state which, although often wobbly, mostly perdured.

Muslim tyrannies have ruined the Middle East. Only secularism will save them. The rise of the West was in part caused by more distance between religion and critical thinking, in particular, humanism and science. 

Iran has a very old civilization. Iranian calendar is seven millennia old… By contrast, the imposition of Islam by invaders is only 13 centuries old. It is high time that Iran frees itself from what the Quran itself called “mere fables for old men”.

This is the beauty and wealth of the Quran: just as reality itself, it contradicts itself. The reason is simple: Uthman, the third successor of Mahomet, had a commission to write the Quran he liked, but he couldn’t erase outright preliminary versions of the Quran: so some of the spirit of these earlier versions survive, here and there. Certainly Mahommet comes out as a more sympathetic, more feminist and more progressive human than any of his successors…

The Shah’s regime was criminal, kleptocratic and ridiculous. (My own dad, a geologist, met with the Shah, with the aime of finding oil for Iran, which was done; thus I lived in Iran a bit, climbing Damavand, among other things.) However the Shah was overthrown by Khomeiny and Al. after Khomeiny flew from France. Khomeini had been weaponized by the CIA in 1953 to throw out the democratically elected Prime Minister Mossadegh. All this to bolster my thesis that:

Muslim Fundamentalism is fundamentally an aspect of the manipulation of Western plutocracy.

Actually, by destroying oil production in Iraq and Iran, Western machinations made sure that fracking for oil and gas would be highly productive… Similarly, pseudo-ecologists were encouraged to attack nuclear energy and hydrogen, and promote unwieldy batteries so that fossil fuels would stay the prime energy providers.

Right now the game has become more dangerous: similarly to what happened in the 1930s, the fascist regimes once encouraged by the West have started to coalesce. Because yes, it is encouraging fascism to pretend that Islam as found in the Quran of Uthman is something to be respected. 

More than 15 centuries ago, Clovis famously quipped that, had he been there with his Franks, Jesus would not have been crucified. But the whole point of Christianism is that God had been crucified by humanity. And Clovis knew this. So the point Clovis was making, at the point of his sword, is that Christianism should be missing its main point: the terror of a God so sadistic, he self-crucify. 

In the Quran, God (“Allah”) is asked why it is that he needs demons, satan and genies, if he is that powerful? Allah haughtily replies that the answer is too complicated for humans to understand. Humans as He likes to have them. Indeed, the answer is that God needs to keep on killing children, pour encourager les autres… 

***

Why would the NYT be an accomplice of child murderers by censoring comments explaining why the children are being murdered?(In some articles I sent comments absolutely avoiding Islam: they were published, while, about the same article, those pointing, even very technically, at Islam were systematically censored; that degree of subtlety in censorship, in 2022 is from humans, not yet machines… And the NYT has indeed an entire human censorship bureau… It reminds me of rooms full of hordes of Facebook censors, who tried to ban me several times for facts of Nazism, not flattering to Nazism, which I had related…)

Obviously because the powers that be beyond the NYT considers that it is better to leave malevolent aspects of Islam unexplained… So that this malevolence can perdure. 

Thus, while the NYT has to admit children are killed by the Iranian theocracy, the NYT pretends that this has nothing to do with the versions of Islam which are dominant today… and are explicitly revered by those who identify just DESCRIBING these versions of Islam with… “Islamophobia” also known as “racism”.

Whereas the racism is of course from those who advocate the sanctity of Islam, as the NYT does, and, therefore, the sanctity of Mullahs, and other criminals exploiting theocracy.  

This is, in part, a case of the NYT being affected with Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. MSP is a mental illness and a form of child abuse. The caretaker of a child, most often a mother, either makes up fake symptoms or causes real symptoms to make it look like the child is sick.

Western plutocracy, especially its fossil fuel branch, has found Fundamentalist Islam highly useful. So it is keen not to criticize Islam. That in turn creates various diseases, and then the main stream media, including the New York Times, pretends to be concerned with what they secretly set-up, namely reverence for Middle Ages’ theocracy… The very sort of oppression against which European civilization fought for 15 centuries!

Patrice Ayme  

Some of the Children killed by Muslim theocrats in Iran (picture from the Islamophile New York Times):

New York Times Approves Comment On God, Seven (7) Years Later!

[The comment below was sent to the NYT on March 23, 2015, under the Obama presidency… It was authorized May 10, 2022! It was luckier than thousands of my comments censored by the NYT]

Tue, May 10, 2022 1:27 am;

The New York Times (comments@nytimes.com)

Your comment has been approved!

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with The New York Times community.

Patrice Ayme | Unverified California

Both Islam and Christianity have in their sacred texts, “verses of the sword” where holly script recommends to “kill unbelievers”.

Once one has become so morally inferior as to be ready to do such terrible things to millions, for so little cause, one is ready for much worse.

Religions based on knowing god, and giving their followers deadly recommendations on how to deal with “unbelievers” incite human beings to the ultimate inhumanity.

Not just because of the potential, theoretical, experimental, and historical mayhem they are prone to.

How could one do something worse than being willing to kill millions for little cause?

Not simply by transforming human beings into vicious human beings. But into even worse creatures.

How could that be?

It is as monstrous as it gets. What is the definition of the human species? Intelligence.

What is dulling human beings’ sense of critique to the point that one would kill for a drawing, or for looking at ancient art, or listening to music?

It is very simple: religions that extreme in light of the lethal consequences their beliefs may bring, make human beings into stupid beasts.

And that, willful beastly stupidity, is the ultimate sin, because it is the ultimate denial of morality.

This is no coincidence: both Christianism and Islamism have been imposed by war chiefs (Roman emperors for Christianism; Muhammad & 4 first Caliphs). They had a vested interest to make those they ruled over credulous, immoral, subdued, and not smart.

View your comment

If you’re having trouble viewing your comment, please copy and paste this link in your browser:

Islam A Clash of Civilization? Because Now Ordering To “Slay” Innocent Individuals Is “Civilized”?

Islamists say that reading and quoting Islam’s Quran is… Islamophobia… Except when they do it themselves! Curious ideology where just looking cause phobia in others… according to its own proponents!

All too many Western plutocratic media agree… with the Islamists! They decry reading Islam as a “clash of civilization”. So if one sends quotes of the Quran, one is described either as a hater of Muslims or an Islamist.

I know Islam, in part because I was raised, from the age of two weeks, in places where Islam was the local religion. Women showed their hair, their faces, and their unsupported naked breasts. They also fought back violently if they perceived the slightest abuse on the part of their fellow-men. Thus, Islam, in the places where I was raised, was really tolerant and non-sexist. These were also Islams of peace. I put it to the plural, because one of these Islam was from the desert (actually, more than one), the other from the Sahel. There is another Islam, the literal Islam found at the core of the dictatorship of the Middle East, which, propelled by petrodollars, is now viewed by Western Pluto media as the only Islam worth having.

***

The New York Times described in detail a case where Islam lethality seems to arise out of nowhere, complete with wealthy mothers blowing up their own children… reminiscent of Ms. Goebbels killing all her children, though they resisted (nota bene: Hitler esteemed Islam a lot).

A case like the Easter Islam bombing in Sri Lanka demonstrates that Islam’s love of murder has nothing to do with colonial oppression, the return of the Jews, or whatever other blame-the victims rationales come up readily in the accusatory schemes which have passed for scholarly reflection for all too long.

The New York Times report described . It offered no explanation whatsoever. It is as if the New York Times were a chicken without a head.

The explanation for both the bombings and the headless chicken is plain and visible: There are what, at face value, in the Qur’an, the strict word of God according to the presently most commonly propagandized of Islam, clear injunctions to kill plenty of humans whom secular law views as innocent. To kill gays Quran just quotes the Bible. Brunei faithfully follows.

The picture above is extracted from an Islamist site. Islamists now have to pretend the Qur’an is “misquoted” when verses ordering to kill are extracted from it. What they allege is that there was a context, and the context was forsaken. I have read the Qur’an more than 100 times, and I can tell you it’s the exact opposite. What Islamists don’t tell you is that the most violent verses, like the Sword Verse, are the most recent… Thus they “abrogate” gentle verses written when Prophet Muhammad was trying to persuade the government in Mecca that His new religion was kosher (literally!)

I sent a comment, to the New York Times on their article of the two super wealthy families, where the Muslim one killed the other. It was censored. A faithful reader of mine asked me:”Did you quote the Qur’an?” I replied:”Of course, yes, that’s the crux of the matter!” My reader replied:”Well then, they will accuse you to “blog” the Qur’an, you know that very well!” It’s true that “The Guardian” in London accused me of “blogging the Qur’an” specifically to justify, the fact they banned me (for life, apparently; “The Guardian” is a pseudo-left paper, secretly financed by Bill Gates, the 200 billion dollars “lover of man”)  

We are living in times so dumb that, when explaining why one is against an ideology, one is systematically accused of advocating it, whenever quoting it, even doing so to trash it. In other words we are living in the world of three words logic.

OK, here is the New York Times:

Two Super-Rich Families Ended Up on Opposite Sides of Easter Attacks

April 27, 2019 COLOMBO, Sri Lanka

“— A little before 9 a.m. on Easter Sunday, Anders Holch Povlsen, the richest man in Denmark, was having breakfast with his family at the Table One restaurant in the Shangri-La Hotel in Sri Lanka’s capital, Colombo.

The restaurant was decorated with crates of oranges, apples and large, uncut pineapples, and the Povlsens looked out on the ocean rollers crashing into a sea wall not far away.

At the same time, Ilham Ibrahim, the son of one of Sri Lanka’s wealthiest spice traders, was heading down to Table One in an elevator. Wearing a baseball cap and a large backpack, he stepped into the elevator with a friend wearing the same thing. Right before the doors opened, CCTV shows, Mr. Ibrahim’s friend flashed him a long, white smile.

The two families, the Povlsens and the Ibrahims, were about to intersect.

One was a billionaire in dollars. The other, a billionaire in rupees. One built a fortune through jeans, turtlenecks and all kinds of hip clothing. The other, through white pepper, black pepper and all kinds of spices.

They both were well-known and admired, part of wildly successful, close-knit business families from opposite ends of the world and perhaps opposite ends of the ideological spectrum.

In an instant, five of their children — Ilham, Inshaf, Alma, Agnes and Alfred — were blown to pieces, one side slaughtered by the other.

Two of the Ibrahim sons — Ilham and his older brother, Inshaf — were among the suicide bombers behind the series of devastating attacks around the country. Sri Lanka’s Muslims have been painfully perplexed by the question of why two of their most privileged sons would do this.”

***

“Painfully Perplexed” The “Muslims” were? Really? Those self-declared “Muslims” never read the Qur’an then? 

The beauty of Islam is that, to become a Muslim, none of these long instructions, and exams, so many other faiths favor. Becoming an Islamist is the simplest thing. One has to say: “La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammad rasoolu Allah.” (That’s Arabic for: super-baboon is super-baboon, and a Muha baboon is Messenger of super.) Then, to become that great Muslim “believer” in lame desert fables, one has also to:

 Believe that the Holy Quran is the literal word of God, revealed by Him.

– Believe that the Judgment Day (Resurrection Day) is true and will come. [Nota Bene: according to Hadith, that requires to kill ALL the Jews first!]

– Believe in the prophets that God sent and the books He revealed, and in His angels. [And the Djinns, and Satan… Not a question to ask Allah, the Qur’an points out!]

– Accept Islam as his/her religion.

– Not worship anything nor anyone except God. [Super is super!]

Thus one can easily see how one would become not just a Muslim, but a “perplexed Muslim”… because although one believes all what’s in the Qur’an, one doesn’t need to have ever read the Qur’an! (At least, Christians are supposed to learn their little fables!) But the problem, of course, is that some young people do read the Qur’an, under the leadership of mad men or exploiters… And then one calls them… Islamists! Islamists DID READ the Qur’an! The Qur’an basically says that the safest way to paradise is to go out, kill some miscreants! See below.

Islamists, caught their pants down with such violent verses, argue it ain’t what it looks like to the pseudo-intellectuals (paid by the fossil fuel plutocratic organization of the world, and its nice “universities”) infecting the Civilization. To suicide bombers, they tell them that God ordered them to slay whoever, whenever…

NYT again, pondering why nice Muslims suddenly decide to believe the Qur’an, and do as indicated therein, and kill all these people Allah has condemned to death… And many of these deaths are horrible: flaying people alive, burning them, making them drink molten lead…. Hey, it’s all in the Qur’an, have fun, read it. It’s not fifteen shades of grey, it’s fifteen shades of horror… NYT:

“Everybody keeps asking me that question,” [Sri Lanka’s Muslims have been painfully perplexed by the question of why two of their most privileged sons would do this] said Hilmy Ahmed, the vice president of the Muslim Council of Sri Lanka. “I don’t know if there ever will be an answer.”

… Perhaps the most striking is how the paths of the Ibrahims and Povlsens, two powerful families with so much to live for, crossed that day.”

Well, the answer in the Qur’an, Mr. Hilmy Ahmed. Free a few hours to read it, please! Understand what you claim to be your own religion, please!

***

Here is the comment of mine which was censored by the NYT:

It’s not very difficult to understand the fanaticism. Either ones believes in Islam, or one doesn’t. What does believing in Islam mean? It varies considerably according to people, individuals, places and history.

As a president of Senegal observed, Wahhabism, as practiced in Arabia, “is a different religion from Islam as practiced in Senegal”.  

The version of Islam financed by petrodollars has come to dominate, as money made it incomparably powerful.  It’s called “Salafism” or Wahhabism”, according to Wahhab, a eighteenth century cleric who took what is in the Qur’an literally. The Qur’an is a short book. Many calls to murder are found therein:

“And slay them wherever ye find them, and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter… and fight them until struggle is no more, and religion is for Allah.“

— Quran 2:191

Thus: keep on killing until all have converted to Islam.

Quran 9:5 is the famous “Verse of the Sword”: …”fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem“… This verse, amongst the youngest of the Quran, abrogates older verses.

“Prophet! Rouse the believers to wage war…”

— Quran, [Quran 8:65]

“Those who believe, fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Satan. So fight you against the friends of Satan...”

— Quran, [Quran 4:76]

Another 100 verses in Quran order mayhem. Killers did as ordered. 

***

That was my comment, it was factual. But fact-based reality is not what Pluto media is all about.

Real fanatics kill in the name of their religion. Those who don’t kill, are amateurs:

The word “fanatic” comes from the Latin “Fanum”, which means temple, shrine, sacred place. Hence “fanaticus” meaning “mad, enthusiastic, inspired by a god”. By the 1520s, it came to also mean “insane person”. The eight religions wars of the end of the 16C quickly proved that the most enthusiastically inspired by God were truly insane. In this case Christians were killing each other, according to their interpretations of Allah, just as muslims do today. In the 17C, the (mostly) religious war in Germany killed a third of the population.

It’s obvious that, when people have decided they know enough to have figured out the universe, either we are mad, or they are. When those who have figured out the universe claim that killing others is essential to the interpretations of the universe they have, it’s clear their cognitions are out of order, and, for our safety, they should be prevented from imposing their fanatical ideologies.

So why is the Literal Islam madness allowed to go on? Because plutocracy gains from it.

Fanatical, literal interpretations of the Qur’an have enormous interests for the global plutocracy: it’s not just that they provide with oil, wealth, and control. They have also made its natural opponents short-circuit.

Tolerating literal interpretations of the  Qur’an brings one to tolerate calls to abusing (women) or even killing most people on Earth (gays, Jews, Christians, “Pagans”, “Polytheists”, “Unbelievers”, “Apostates”, etc…). Islamists kill Muslims in particular because they decide at some point that they have renounced Islam (“apostasy”). In recent years literally millions were killed that way. And then, when a US Representative preaches that sort of Islam, one is supposed to not criticize her, because if one did, one would be called “racist”.

***

OK, more New York Times, in another article on the Wahhabist take over in Sri Lanka:

“April 28, 2019 KATTANKUDY, Sri Lanka — When the Wahhabis came, with their austere ideology and abundant coffers, the town of Kattankudy yielded fertile ground.

In this part of Sri Lanka, faith was often the sole sustaining force during the civil war that raged for nearly three decades. Wahhabism — a hard-line strain of Islam blamed for breeding militancy — proposed a direct path to God, albeit one that aimed to return the religion to the time of the Prophet Muhammad.

It was here in Kattankudy’s warren of homes decorated with delicate swirls of Arabic calligraphy that Zaharan Hashim, the man accused of masterminding the Easter Sunday attacks in Sri Lanka, grew up. And it was here that he preached his ideology, calling for the killing of nonbelievers in Islam and even other Muslims.….

The Sri Lankan police say that at least two of the suicide bombers involved in the attacks, which killed at least 250 people, were from Kattankudy. The Islamic State claimed responsibility.

Beginning on Friday evening, just down the coast from the town, a raid on a house linked to the Easter bombings turned violent, leaving 15 dead and wounding the wife and child of Mr. Zaharan. Some of the dead, thought to include Mr. Zaharan’s brother and other immediate family, blew themselves up as security forces closed in. The Islamic State also claimed a connection to this shootout.

It was in the 1980s that Kattankudy, one of the few almost exclusively Muslim towns in Buddhist-majority Sri Lanka, began blossoming into a center of Islamic life. The town was enriched by Saudi money for mosques and madrasas, work-abroad contracts and university scholarships.

But the advent of Wahhabism, with its isolating dogma, has also shaken this multifaith island where minority Muslims have traditionally practiced a more inclusive faith. Birthed in Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism’s stern intolerance denigrates not only those who don’t believe in Islam but other Muslim sects as well.

While Saudi Arabia insists the faith does not call for violence, critics have long blamed the kingdom’s mass export of its austere creed for fueling extremism and terrorism abroad. Al Qaeda’s leader, Osama bin Laden, and most of the hijackers in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were from Saudi Arabia, and the Islamic State used Saudi religious textbooks inside its self-styled caliphate in Syria and Iraq.….

There are more than 60 mosques in Kattankudy for a population of 45,000, and most now subscribe to conservative strains of Islam, including Wahhabism. At the New Kattankudy Grand Jumma Mosque, designed as a replica of Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, one of Islam’s holiest sites, construction workers are laying intricate blue mosaics as part of the town’s mosque-building boom.

“After the age of 7, everyone must pray five times a day, so we always need more mosques,” said M.I.M. Irfan, the mosque’s secretary.

Saudi diplomats visited, too.

The Saudis and others from the gulf also supported a plan by M.L.A.M. Hizbullah, a Kattankudy native who is now governor of Eastern Province, to open an Islamic-inspired university campus in his hometown.

Mr. Hizbullah is against reversing regulations that allow Sri Lankan Muslim men to marry children and have multiple wives. …

Beginning in 2004, Wahhabi-influenced youth from Kattankudy began attacking Sufis, who practice a mystical form of Islam. Grenades were thrown and swords thrust. Hundreds of Sufis were forced from their homes.”

***

All the preceding was in the New York Times. Anybody sane would deduce that “Islam” is an insane religion… but it gets better than that: the Western Pluto media has a pro-Wahhabist bias.

“Sufism” is always described, by ignorant, and biased academics and their parrots such as those at the New York Times, as “mystical”. In truth Sufism is often clever, social, non-sexist, tolerant, low-key, rational, human, gentle and very far from the lethal madness in the Qur’an. Sufism is generally civilization compatible, Wahhabism is only plutocracy compatible, as it preaches ultimate violence..

New York Times goes on, in the same article, describing the evil of Wahhabists:

“Although Kattankudy’s Islamic organizations are horrified by Mr. Zaharan’s militancy and have eschewed violence, most have campaigned for years against Sufis.

“Those people, it is not Islam,” said M.L.M. Nassar, a member of the Federation of Kattankudy Mosques and Muslim Institutions. “It’s a deviation.”

… The talk of jihad emanating from some of Kattankudy’s hard-line clerics appalled him, he said.”

Indeed, those who deviate, according to Salafist tradition, or, more exactly, according to the Qur’an and the second most sacred book of Islam, have to be killed. Here we go with the little murder book:

“Quran (4:89) – “They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliya’ (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allah (to Muhammad). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliya’ (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them.”

You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority.

— Quran 4:91

Make ye no excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you, for that they are in sin.

— Quran 9:66

He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief– on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.

— Quran 16:106]

The Hadith goes further:

In Sahih al-Bukhari, the most important book in Sunni Islam after the Qur’an, and Sahih Muslim punishments for apostasy are described as follows:[45][46]

Allah’s Apostle said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17, see also Sahih Muslim, 16:4152, Sahih Muslim, 16:4154

Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn ‘Abbas, who said… No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'”

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:260

A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu’adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu’adh asked, “What is wrong with this (man)?” Abu Musa replied, “He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism.” Mu’adh said, “I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle.”

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:89:271

***

In 90 years, Islam made the most gigantic empire. Systematic massacres, violating all the laws of war as understood by Greco-Romans and Persians, were used to do so. However, killing, for example, all combat age men in Syria, had long-term social and economic, not to say cultural and psychological consequences… The wealth of Syria under the Late Greco-Roman empire in the 6C, never came back…

Islam makes excellent fiction, full of gore. I am all for it, as a piece of thrilling literature, as I am all for various fairy tales about ogres, murderous queens, etc. By all means keep it, for entertainment, bed time reading But when Islam is seriously preached and taught as reality, in its literal version, with super baboon is heavens giving real orders, it simply constitute the world’s most elaborated hate crime ideology. Hence its fantastic military success, in its first few decades, when it succeeded to annihilate the 27 centuries old Mesopotamian religion and civilization, and occupy more than half of the Sumero-Egypto-Creto-Greco-Roman empire and civilization… before being stopped by Constantinople’s Navy and annihilated and counterattacked by the Franks.

So why all the tolerance for the Wahhabists, and calling racist to frown on their invading, hating ways?

Just think a moment: Senator Sanders  is described as a “socialist”. However, all he advocates was the norm 60 years ago, in Europe: free education, free healthcare. Then, California had instituted free education too, even at the university level.

What is the difference now? Tolerance for the intolerable. The sheeple out there has learned to tolerate the intolerable. So why is Sanders now viewed as a “socialist”, although he would have been viewed mainstream way back? Why is that sort of extremism in appreciation not viewed as intolerable?One method? Corrupt women go out there and celebrate the subjugation of women by “Submission” (=”Islam”)… and all the self-declared “liberals” applaud how remarkable, admirable, and a stupendous advance it is, to cover women like tents, and subjugate them to men, just like 14 centuries ago, in the savage desert…

Indeed, what is the most intolerable? Calling tolerable an intolerable superstition. Once one has been trained to find intolerable those who do not to tolerate a religion which says all sorts of innocent individuals should be killed [1], one is trained to find tolerable all and any possible abuse. And trample on any reason.

So Sanders is a socialist, and US Rep Omar promotes peace and sexual equity, right. And the Earth is square like an orange, sure. Civilizational failure is generally preceded by cognitive failure.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

To be killed according to Hadith and Qur’an: Countless “unbelievers”, “pagans”. “polytheists”, “apostates”, gays, people having sex out-of-wedlock… except if they are raping soldiers of Allah, of course… See: https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2015/01/16/thought-crime/

Hadith 41;6985: ”Allah’s Messenger: The last hour would NOT COME UNLESS the Muslims will FIGHT AGAINST THE JEWS and the MUSLIMS WOULD KILL THEM…”

Quran (4:89) – “… if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold) of them and kill them wherever you find them…”

The “apostasy” is in the eye of the beholder: there is no religious organization in Islam distinguished from the political organization: the religious chief, emir, is also the political, and war chief, a la Bin Laden. This is why Fundamentalist Muslims tend to kill Muslims they decide don’t believe anymore…

 

Islamist Death Cult Propaganda: Destructive To Truth, Humanity

A university professor in Northern Ireland, historically a place of religious hatred, wrote an essay for Aeon which is pro-Islam in what supposed to be a smart way: “Beyond Liberal Islam. Western liberalism is not the apex and terminus of human history, and it ought not to serve as the measure of Islam. Can Islam help to produce an appealing alternative to liberal societies? Is it time to look beyond the idea of liberal Islam?”

The author keeps sneaking in as obvious, enormously debatable, not to say deeply erroneous concepts. Such as: “The fallacious arguments of Islamophobes”, “the fact Muslim regimes are backwards for historical rather than metaphysical reasons”.

Of course not true. Islam is an extremely dangerous and reductive superstition. All too many people are ignorant of the fact the “West” was NOT Christian. The Frankish empire pretty much covered all of Europe, including Britain after 1066 CE… except for southern Spain.

The West was not just “Christian”. Whereas Islamist countries were just Islamist. More exactly, and differently from Islamist countries, where law and governance were Islamist, law and governance was not “Christian” in the West. The fundamental laws of Europe under the Franks were mostly Roman law plus (Latin written) Salic law. Both were secular laws. The leadership was also secular (although Charlemagne gave to the Pope some territories in Italy in 800 CE).

The superstition wants to kill or subject most of humanity:

https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2009/06/22/some-violence-in-holy-quran/

Islamist law, the Sharia, contradicts UN law, itself an extension of “Western” law. It is, literally, outlaw.

K Vora answered my preceding comment in Aeon. Before I get to that reply, let me add the following map:

548 invasion main battles by Islam Jihad in 250 years. Initially, the green area, Islamist by 900 CE, was Greco-Roman (or associated civilizations, Seleucid, Etruscan, Latin, and, or Punic) for more than a millennium. After the invasions, non-Muslims were the subjugated, oppressed majority for many centuries, causing what’s paradoxically, and misleadingly known as the “Golden Age of Islam“!

I listened to the following video, which is accurate on its main points:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_To-cV94Bo

(There were other crusades, against non-Muslims, such as cathars and Prussians, that’s the main inaccuracy of the video, which is irrelevant to its main message.)

***

K Vora

I appreciate your well reasoned comment. Unfortunately, it will be distorted by well known probably paid commenters (one can search the names and see how many well reasoned comments have been obfuscated by them). We must accept Islam for what it is: A tool for the rogue elements of humanity (mostly males) to subjugate all others, in person and in thought. I hope Aeon does not block this response because we must confront our genetics in our evolutions (many paths) and if we critically analyse the behaviors of islamic regimes and societies, we have to explore rogue genes, whether y, or x, or corrupted.

***

Thanks K Vora! Yes, those paid commenters are a problem, and not just with Islam, or religion.

Paid commenters are a problem all over the Internet. And not just the Internet: universities and governments too. Legislation needs to be drawn, because what we have now is a sort of Orwellian 1984 of greed, where “Big Brother” is a compendium of the worst demons of our nature, and rules our information system.

Yes, we must confront our genetics, or, more exactly, the misuse of our genetics by our massively changed circumstances, namely the rise of civilization. (The word “mass” is literal here: the mass of humanity has gone up by a factor of a thousand from what it was during the evolution of the genus Homo…)

The very rise of Islam was entangled with a military strategic observation. Muhammad considered that the tremendous war between the Greco-Roman and the Sassanids, which had just concluded, had weakened both civilizations so much, that, for the first time in 1,000 years, Arabs could hope to raid the Fertile Crescent. Again. The Prophet was right. Desert raiders went according to rougher morals. For example, they used to kill girls liberally. When not enslaving them crudely (for future sale). Muhammad condemned the practice of killing girls, and encouraged slavers to impregnate their girl captives. Both measures led to a population explosion of young males, who became the young, fanaticized warriors of the invading Muslim Arab armies.

So not all is negative about Fundamental Islam. But even the positive, inasmuch as it reinforces Islam, can be negative. Because, indeed, as you said, Islam is about making the rogue, or at least, hyper-violent side of humanity into a religion. The most intriguing part is that the individual devoted to Fundamentalist Islam doesn’t perceive that way. Instead what they perceive is a totally organized life, dawn to dusk. One should read “the final rituals” (and the full three parts description of travelling to Medina and Mecca):

“Hasan stopped me on my way to the lavatory carrying a roll of tissue; he explained with lively gestures – words not sufficing – that I should cleanse myself with water after defecation. Islamic toilet etiquette calls for pouring water with the right hand and wiping oneself with the left. I nodded to him in agreement and continued on my way, with the paper. It felt like a small victory for Western civilization.

On a related subject, Mina has the most appallingly inadequate sanitation facilities. They are plentiful but so filthy that most pilgrims prefer the outdoors. Mecca and Muna both being located on hills and in valleys, streams of urine and waste water flow across great distances at considerable speeds. The Grand Mosque, where some 75,000 pilgrims sleep each night of the hajj, has no public water facilities except the Zamzam well. While no one excretes in the mosque itself, many do so just outside it, even against its walls. I myself did this once; though feeling terribly conspicuous and expecting a reprimand, in fact no one paid me any attention. I found it strange that the Grand Mosque and the Hill of Mercy, Islam’s two holiest spots, also serve as lavatories for the faithful.”

The reason for that totally organized life in Fundamental Islam is exactly the reason why military life is totally organized: it is the most basic training for obedience, core of the ability of the warrior. It’s why some view the Foreign Legion as a death cult. https://aeon.co/essays/why-young-men-queue-up-to-die-in-the-french-foreign-legion

This being said, there are 100 variants of Islam. Many are well aware of the preceding and ended up as far removed as possible from Salafism (=Wahhabism = Fundamentalism). However, those types of Islam are unknown in the West, and oil money has done its best to suppress them. So now, when talking about “Islam” what the ignorant mean, especially in the West, is Salafism… A type of Fundamentalism thoroughly discredited in Egypt by 1200 CE (it was subjected to the death penalty), and de facto ignored in the best parts of the “Golden Age of Islam”.

(What happened next is that savage invaders, the Mongols and Turks, decapitated the Middle East and North Africa, as they massacred the elites, and took possession of the lands: Arabic speaking intellectual guidance was lost, only illiterate peasants survived.)

Another video, a sort of baby version of what I have long written (albeit with the major blemish of ignoring the ravages of fanatical Christianism in the Greco-Roman empire):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_Qpy0mXg8Y

The thesis that the islam and invasion caused the collapse of civilization is known as “Pirenne’s thesis”. Pirenne was a famous historian of the 1930s, who wrote “Mohammed and Charlemagne”.  

Henri Pirenne’s remarkable classic — published after his death — offers a revolutionary perspective on how Europe evolved as the Roman Empire centered in Constantinople evolved into the Europe of Charlemagne and the Middle Ages. I agree with most of what’s in it, but I do not view it as the end all, be all.

Departing from the standard view that Germanic invasions obliterated the Roman Empire, Pirenne advances the radical new thesis that “the cause of the break with the tradition of antiquity was the rapid and unexpected advance of Islam,” and event of historical proportions that prevented the western Mediterranean from being what it had always been: a thoroughfare of commerce and thought. It became instead what Pirenne refers to as “a Musulman lake,” thereby causing “the axis of life [to shift] northwards from the Mediterranean” for the first time in history.

The other standard view, as advocated by Gibbon, was that civilization collapsed because of Christianism.

My own version is more subtle: Christianism and the invasions were a consequence of the Roman Republic collapse and the subsequent political and intellectual fascism that resulted.

Islam itself an aftershock of all this (both the Persians and the Romans quasi-ruled Arabia; Rome traded with India for centuries through its control of the Red Sea).

Islamophilia, in the sense of the love of Salafism, is fundamentally lethal for, not just civilization, but human ethology, even intelligence.

Vigilance and subtlety should be our mantra. Today it was announced that MI5 (British “Intelligence”) tried to assassinate the Irish Prime Minister.

MI5 asked a loyalist paramilitary group to assassinate the Irish prime minister during the height of the conflict in Northern Ireland, according to claims in newly released government documents. The records show that in 1987, Prime Minister Charles Haughey was informed by a letter sent from the Protestant Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) that British Intelligence wanted him dead.

In it, they claimed to Haughey that “in 1985 we were approached by a MI5 officer attached to the NIO [Northern Ireland Office] and based in Lisburn, Alex Jones was his supposed name,” the UVF said. “He asked us to execute you.” The letter was among the Irish government archives released today. Unsatisfied with the refusal, MI5 then asked the UVF if they would accept the blame. UVF said they turned down the request, telling the Taoiseach: “We refused to do it. We were asked would we accept responsibility if you were killed. We refused.” 

Real history is more complicated in crucial ways than simpletons have it. One shouldn’t confuse the history of myths, with the history of facts. Look at Islam like you should look at MI5.

Patrice Ayme’

Islamophilia Causes Islam Terror

Islamophilia, a neologism, is the love of Islam, similar in the construction of the word, to the word pedophilia, the love of children (with the semantic twist, in the case of pedophilia, that it is meant to be the (implied) sexual love of children, a behavior presently unlawful). I use “Islamophilia” as an antidote to “Islamophobia“, also a word of recent manufacture, which is brandished for the purpose of demolishing civilization.

Pseudo-intellectuals supported Nazism. They had to be killed, before they killed us all (because killing us all, or so, is what they wanted). The necessity to kill millions of Nazis and Nazism itself was understood too late: dozen of millions of innocent bystanders got killed as a result. There are pseudo-intellectuals on the take, who, for decades, told everybody that to fear Islam (Islamophobia: phobia means fear in Greek) was “racism”. So I guess when I fear wasps, and vipers, I am racist, according to these vicious, venal idiots.

A Central Asian Islamist drove a truck down a special bike lane in New York. At least 8 killed. After nine blocks, at 40 mph, he burns a red light, and destroy his truck against a school bus full of screaming children. What was the name of that criminal (who should get the death penalty)” “Sword of Allah“, in Arabic. That is his name! And he was in the USA on a Green Card, an immigrant card!!! Better: that Uzbek came on a “Diversity Visa Program“. These are visas given by lottery to individuals from “under-represented countries” who apply, online, even if they have no skills, and no ties to the USA. Fifty thousands (50,000) are given a year (!) Al Qaeda and ISIS have used the program to implant “sleepers”. Obama judges love it (for their real motivation, read the end of this essay). (Trump has suggested to eliminate “Diversity Visas“, but was blocked by judges for being “anti-Muslim”.)

Of course, “Sword of Allah” was a “nice guy” (even though a Uber driver!) They are all “nice guys“, and that’s why they want to please their Aztec, or Islam god. The nicer they are, the more they want to please. God. Their God. That’s why they say always “God is Great”. Because it ain’t obvious: their “god”‘ rather seems to be a scum. The Uzbek scum, Sword of Allah, apparently killed or wounded children (some say up to 4 killed). It’s precisely because they are nice and want to be so nice to their scum dog of a god, that they are so dangerous. And tolerating their scum dog god, is the highest danger. It’s the scum dog god, who has to be destroyed, as an object of veneration.

The Qur’an is a 83,000 words book. It is a terror book, with hundreds of threats against all sorts of people: hypocrites, homosexuals, “polytheists”, apostates, individuals viewed as having denied or despised Islam, all sorts of believers in beliefs Islam does not believe in, etc. Also the Qur’an says those who die for Allah go to sit next to God, and then heavens, once all the Jews (!) have been killed.

Right, not much of Qur’an metaphysics is original, it would be unfair to single out Islam as a belief system: it’s not the worst that ever was. Close, but no cigars. (Because, first of all Islam by Muhammad was transformed within 20 years into a much more sexist version, thank to the third Caliph, Uthman. So what is, what should Islam really be?)

The ancient Viking religion,  3,000 year old (thus more than twice older than Islam), also rewarded warriors who had died in battle with heavens. (However, it was much more advanced, most of the time, in the role women played: some women had full rights with the Vikings, for example by being warriors, whereas this happened just once with Islam! In Egypt, when confronting France’s Saint Louis!) And, to a great extent, the Qur’an refers to the Bible with its Old Testament full of horrors.

Some will say:”Oh, but there is good stuff therein!” Sure, but, once you are dead, what good does good do to you? I personally despise those who follow in full the ancient Viking religion, the Bible, the Aztecs, or Catholicism as practiced in the Middle Ages. That does not make me racist, quite the opposite. That makes me civilized. More civilized. The same extends to Islam.

Islam believers, in black, killing Christian workers they captured, just because they are non Muslim.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_kidnapping_and_beheading_of_Copts_in_Libya

“Oh people, recently you’ve seen us on the hills of Al-Sham [Greater Syria] and on Dabiq‘s Plain, chopping off the heads that had been carrying the cross delusion for a long time, filled with spite against Islam and Muslims, and today we… are sending another message: Oh crusaders, safety for you will be only wishes especially when you’re fighting us all together, therefore we will fight you all together until the war lays down its burdens and Jesus peace be upon him will descend, breaking the cross, killing the swine. The sea you’ve hidden Sheikh Osama bin Laden‘s body in, we swear to Allah we will mix it with your blood.

So how come the savagery of fundamental Islam, straight from 660 CE is back?

Since the 1930s, US oil men have made an alliance with the Saudi family which, itself, had made an alliance with Wahhab, someone who interpreted the basic texts of Islam literally. Thus, when a basic text seems to say that God wants someone killed, or tortured, for some reason, one should do so.

Literal Islam is incompatible with civilization. As a result, it was dropped by the Baghdad Caliphate, for centuries (“Golden Age of Islam”), and then Saladin (1117-1193), a Kurd who became Sultan of Egypt and Syria, and founder of the Ayyubid dynasty, made Literal Islam (= Salafism) unlawful. Practicing it brought the death penalty. Wahhab re-introduced it five centuries later.  

However, plutocrats (those who rule, kratos, according to evil, Pluto) have a symbiotic relation with deadly religions. This is why Roman emperors invented and imposed Catholicism, imposing the death penalty to those who chose otherwise (heresy in Greek; Fourth Century). Once a deadly religion is in place, the Plutos in power can accuse whoever they want of disrespecting the religion, and threaten to kill them, insuring their rule.

The universities have been active proselytizers of hard-core, fundamental Islam. Consider: “Philosophy Professor Tells Bisexual Student Who Criticized Islam ‘We’re Not Going to Let You Damage the Program'”. 

Read this surreal exchange below. “Browning is a pseudo-intellectual heading a philosophy department. MacDonald a student she terrorizes because he dared mention that he is to be killed by Islam law in at least ten countries.  Browning is trying her best to make the situation personal, instead of about Islam Law.

MACDONALD: I said that I was bothered that I could be killed in 10 Muslim countries. I’m bisexual. So they’d definitely do that in the 10 countries where I would be— you know.

BROWNING: Doesn’t that strike you as an inappropriate thing to say about someone’s fiance?

MACDONALD: I wasn’t talking about the fiance. The fiance could have whatever interpretation of the religion that they want. I said something like…(thinking) that I…yeah it wasn’t about the fiance, it was about the religious practices in those countries.

BROWNING: How is it appropriate to bring that up in connection with someone’s fiance?

MACDONALD: They brought it up. The Islam part.

BROWNING: And you brought up the threat to your life as posed by this fiance?

MACDONALD: No. We got to the subject of Islam, not the fiance.

BROWNING: Do you understand how someone would find that offensive?…

MACDONALD: Yeah, one of my good friends at the university is Muslim.

BROWNING: And do you tell him that you object to his religion because there are places on earth where gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are discriminated against, including your own country?

MACDONALD: Well, “her.” And my verbiage was “killed” not “discriminated against.” I mean, death penalty’s pretty severe.

BROWNING: What does that have to do with her being engaged to a Muslim?

MACDONALD: Nothing. I wasn’t talking about the engagement to the Muslim. I was talking about Islam in that particular moment.

BROWNING: Well, let me just say that kind of thing is not going to be tolerated in our department. We’re not going to tolerate graduate students trying to make other graduate students feel terrible for our emotional attachments.

MACDONALD: Um…all right.

BROWNING: And, if you don’t understand why that is, I can explain fully, or I can refer you to the Behavior Intervention Team on our campus, which consists of a counselor, faculty member, and person from student affairs who are trained on talking to people about what’s appropriate or what isn’t….

BROWNING: Those are things that would get you fired if you were working in my office. The Islam comment would get you fired.

MACDONALD: …Would it really get me fired to say that I could be killed somewhere?

BROWNING: In that situation as you’ve described it, absolutely yes.

MACDONALD: How?

BROWNING: Don’t even ask. It’s clear you’re not taking my word for it. I don’t care to convince you. If I can’t persuade you that it’s in your interest to behave in ways that other people don’t find offensive and objectionable, then at least I’ve done my job.

MACDONALD: Well I know that it’s in my interest. I’m just trying to understand the reasoning.

BROWNING: You don’t have to.

MACDONALD: Well, this is a truth-seeking discipline!”

Browning is not into truth, she is into getting paid, and oil yielding plutocrats faking fanaticism is where the money is.

As universities get money from those whose rule depends upon lethal interpretations of Islam, it’s only understandable that, from their point of view, any exposition of that Islam in the West is not kosher. It’s not just US universities, Oxford University employs as professor an “Islamologist” who has long been accused of rape, and various serious crimes, and whose grandfather founded the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization which worked with the Nazis. That organization’s motto: “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

For years, Ramadan and his accomplices were all over French TV, teaching that any fear of Islam (“Islamophobia”) was racist. Ramadan, a racist, vicious, violent man, and a well-known rapist of women is professor in no less than two departments at Oxford University, because our leaders are on the take.

Glamour Magazine is owned by Advance Publishing, a privately (plutocratically) held company nearly a century old. The latest issue, named Linda Sarsour one of its Glamour 2017 Women of the Year. As a co-chair of the Women’s March, Sarsour has been honored by Time Magazine and defended by the New York Times as a target of “right-wing hate.” But no one among those who celebrate Sarsour has pointed out that Sarsour has actually promoted Sharia law as beneficial, and proclaimed “Jihad”  against American citizens. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali‏Verified account @Ayaan put it:

“What this scumbag did today is called Jihad. How he got there is through dawa: the process of indoctrination that poisons minds.” [2:46 PM – 31 Oct 2017]

Ayaan was born a Muslim in Somalia and thus was sexually mutilated when a girl. She escaped later to Europe, but then had to flee Europe when her collaborator Theo Van Gogh, a movie maker was savagely and repeatedly stabbed by a Moroccan who had read Van Gogh fit in one of these categories which God has ordered to be killed, as proven in the Qur’an. The entire police-justice system in Europe has been engineered to be soft on Muslim Fundamentalists: people such as Tariq Ramadan, who should be in prison, teach at Oxford instead.

Tariq Ramadan is part of a smirking and smiling group of well financed pseudo-intellectuals fostering Islamism, and it extends to an entire pseudo-left which was the forerunner of the same movement now in evidence in the USA. I agree with many of the theses of Edwy Plenel, founder of Mediapart: he actually follows some of what I have been saying publicly for decades. Yet, Edwy Plenel  is a judoka working for the establishment, in the guise of opposing it. That’s why they smile and smirk so much: they know something they believe their mesmerized audience does not suspect, the back of the establishment (same problem as with the Clintons, or Obama). Plenel pushes for Islamism, Sharia and Jihad even more efficiently than Ramadan (because he is less obvious). It should go without saying that, even the extreme right is not as anti-left than the partisans of Islamism, Sharia and Jihad. It should, but, amazingly, it does not: a Middle Age fanaticism Trojan Horse like Edwy Plenel is viewed as “left” and a genuine opponent of the establishment… when he is the exact opposite! He is an objective ally of Aramco, and Wall Street’s worst aspects.

The Jihadist from Tunisia who cut the throat and disembolled to death twenty year women in Marseilles had no right to be in the EU. He had given 7 different identities, and had not been expelled from the EU.

Mentally corrupt judges are the festering infection behind this epidemic. They will put free spirits in jail, for insulting Islam, an ideology, because those hare brained “judges” claim from their abyssal Perfectly Corrupt little minds, that depicting Islam for what it is, is “racism”. We would have the exact same situation if the Nazis had won: depicting Nazism for what it is would be called “racism”, and punished with prison.

The New York governor, two hours after the vicious attack in Manhattan, claimed it was the work of a “lone wolf“. Nevermind the allegiance of “Sword Of Allah” to ISIS, and its black flag in the truck. He said that because “Democrats” are supposed to say that. Of course, wolves are social animals.

They maybe lone wolves, but they are howling with Fundamental Islam.

For greater terror, let’s keep on singing the praises and pretend we are not afraid of an ideology, that wants to kill us. Our pro-wealth leaders want us to be terrorized and irrational. Once we are in that state of mind, hyper wealth can rule over us easily.

More generally, by making sure we fail to see we should not pay our respects to Fundamental Islam, our ideological leaders are making sure that we are unable to think clearly. Or, more exactly, they make sure that we keep on learning NOT to be able to think clearly.

Patrice Ayme’

 

Islam, An Ideology of Murder Respected by Degenerates

Two attacks and one explosion in Catalonia last night, with deaths in Barcelona, Cambril, and Alcanar. There are at least 19 dead, and more than one hundred injured (including 17 French citizens in “urgence absolue”, that is extreme critical care). The attacks were claimed by the Islamist State. Apparently they were Moroccans. The next day, it was the turn of Finland.

A 18 year old “asylum seeking” Moroccan attempted to, and killed women. At least two Finnish women died, half a dozen others were stabbed. A few days later, it was the turn of Marseille, France, where a truck driver wounded and killed a number of people at bus stops. The cause of all this murdering, attempted and realized? The mythology of Fundamental Islam, or, more precisely, the respect it has enjoyed all too long, among civilized people.

Much could have been killed in Catalonia, if not for a single Catalan police woman who shot to death no less than FOUR drugged out Jihadists. In France the number of radicalized, dangerous known Jihadists, went from 13,000 to 18,500 (latest number, August 2017).

My nephew has close “Muslim” friends. At my urging, over the years, he recently read some of the Qur’an. He told me that the first impression is that “le Coran a été écrit par un fou” (the Qur’an was written by a madman).

Here we have a book which wants to “throw people into the fire”, every other page (the Bible does this more rarely).

As Surah 4, verse 56 has it, and this is the Muslim God allegedly speaking:

“Indeed, those who disbelieve in Our verses – We will drive them into a Fire. Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted in Might and Wise.”

Well, F your verses, Mr. God! Hopefully, we will grow thick enough a skin, one of these days. Western politicians go around, wondering how come so many Muslims get “radicalized”. Maybe they don’t how to read? “Radical” means from the root. Here we show some of the roots of Islam, they are vicious, by normal, decent, human standards.

The Qur’an is not just full of lethal threats, but also of rather funny insults.

So you want to end “terrorism”? End the literal preaching of this kind of hateful, lethal garbage.

And, especially stop telling us that throwing a critical look at this sort of lethal garbage is “racist”. Because all you will do, in the end, is to tell normal people that they are “racist” (the sort of reaction which brought the election of Trump, let alone the rule of plutocratic fascist rule which preceded it).

In Tunisia, a woman inherits only half of what a man inherits, and a Tunisian woman can’t marry a non-Muslim. And supposedly Tunisia is NOT an Islamist Republic. The 90-year-old Tunisian president want to change this anti-equality laws, but he is isolated, hated by the Jihadists, young and furious. Change requires physical courage. The chief of Islam in Tunisia came forward to support the president: no doubt he is high on the Jihadists’ list.

The “antifa” rage at the KKK and Neonazis, who are nowhere in power. Why don’t the “antifa” not rage at theocratic fascism? Instead some of the loudest of the opposition to Trump is theocratic fascist. Consider Linda Sarsour, who called for a “Jihad” against Trump.

Why did most “Western” “intellectuals” embrace (the respect of) Islam?

Because they were trying to please those who have the oil. Hint: not just the Saudis. We are enjoying the “Great Bitter Lake” conspiracy.   The Justice System followed: it gave right of asylum to Jihad criminals condemned to death in their own countries. That was confusing fascists and victims: laws which were made to accept genuine victims of fascism were turned into laws to protect the fascists themselves!

To fight Islam, in its fundamental version, one needs first to withdraw the respect it enjoys.

Withdrawing respect can, and should be, withdrawn to many infamous ideologies. This is the first step in fighting them. Know them, and then, when you know them well, and because you know them well, spite them.

Patrice Ayme’

 

 

Abuse of Muslim Women Ignored By Western Leadership, and Why

The tolerance of inhuman, hard core Islam is symptomatic of the venality of elites and their “elected” servants, who we have to endure, all around the world. That’s not very surprising: the very principle of letting a few thousand people (“elected” or not) decide the fate of the biosphere, and, in particular more than seven billion people, is intrinsically demented and immoral.

Pseudo progressives claim “all religions have to be respected”, but then why not religions ordering human sacrifices? Answer: they do, because hard-core Islam does order human sacrifices of the many types of people the Qur’an orders to kill.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali (@ayaan) and Asra Q. Nomani (@asranomani), are authors (and in the case of Ayaan, an ex-Member of the Dutch Parliament) who were born into Islam, and got mutilated and abused as a result. The New York Times allowed them to write an “Op-Ed” (a vicious notion, as if the usual editorials of the New York Times had no opinion!))  Ms. Nomani is a co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, once a Dutch MP, was hunted out of Europe by murderous Islamists and various lethal fatwas. Authorities there proved unable and unwilling to protect hurt from rabid Islamists. Whereas there are very few Muslim from most fanatical Islamist region in the USA (yet!), where she took refuge, there are orders of magnitude more in Europe.

The New York Times blocked my comment on this excellent editorial (showing its duplicity: it claims that my comments are blocked by editors at the New York Times, but Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a friend and does not block me in social networks, far from it!). The true reason for the NYT blocking me? Because those posing as “liberals”, who are part of the elite, are more often than not, not “liberal” at all, but simply, venal, corrupt, greedy!

Gender equality is a fundamental human trait. Any ideology ordering otherwise should be unlawful to preach, especially to the youth. Not all variant of Islam are sexist: they are outliers in the “Sufi” tradition, for example in West Africa. However mainstream Islam is deeply sexist, women being literally at best only a fraction of men.

That present day “liberals” refuse to see this means that they are just taking orders from the powers that be (the ones which got them elected to start with). A basic triangular conspiracy exists between oil-producing monarchies, international finance and elected politicians. It was set in stone when president Roosevelt met with Abdulaziz Ibn Saud, king of Saudi Arabia, in 1945.

The attitude of present day “liberal” leaders relative to Islam is revealing of their general attitude relative to the elites and the mighty: they join them rather than contradict them. Their positions arise from greed for their personal power, rather than principle for humanity.

****

(Part of) Text from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Asra Nomani below:

The so-called “left”, or self-described “liberal” elite, verily, an elite of leeches, has never read Voltaire, or Montaigne. All it read is that Wall Street and Saudi Arabia have all the money. Compare Ayaan’s saying with Voltaire’s own:”One must crush infamy!”

June 22, 2017

… “Senator Harris took her seat in front of us as a member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We were there to testify about the ideology of political Islam, or Islamism.

… just moments before the hearing began, a man wearing a Muslim prayer cap had stood up and heckled us, putting Capitol police officers on high alert. We were girding ourselves for tough questions.

But they never came. The Democrats on the panel, including Senator Harris and three other Democratic female senators — North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, New Hampshire’s Maggie Hassan and Missouri’s Claire McCaskill — did not ask either of us a single question.

This wasn’t a case of benign neglect. At one point, Senator McCaskill said that she took issue with the theme of the hearing itself. “Anyone who twists or distorts religion to a place of evil is an exception to the rule,” she said. “We should not focus on religion,” she said, adding that she was “worried” that the hearing, organized by Senator Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin, would “underline that.” In the end, the only questions asked of us about Islamist ideologies came from Senator Johnson and his Republican colleague, Senator Steve Daines from Montana.

Just as we are invisible to the mullahs at the mosque, we were invisible to the Democratic women in the Senate.

How to explain this experience? Perhaps Senators Heitkamp, Harris, Hassan and McCaskill are simply uninterested in sexism and misogyny. But obviously, given their outspoken support of critical women’s issues, such as the kidnapping of girls in Nigeria and campus sexual assault, that’s far from the case.

No, what happened that day was emblematic of a deeply troubling trend among progressives when it comes to confronting the brutal reality of Islamist extremism and what it means for women in many Muslim communities here at home and around the world. When it comes to the pay gap, abortion access and workplace discrimination, progressives have much to say. But we’re still waiting for a march against honor killings, child marriages, polygamy, sex slavery or female genital mutilation.

Sitting before the senators that day were two women of color: Ayaan is from Somalia; Asra is from India. Both of us were born into deeply conservative Muslim families. Ayaan is a survivor of female genital mutilation and forced marriage. Asra defied Shariah by having a baby while unmarried. And we have both been threatened with death by jihadists for things we have said and done. Ayaan cannot appear in public without armed guards.

In other words, when we speak about Islamist oppression, we bring personal experience to the table in addition to our scholarly expertise.

Yet the feminist mantra so popular when it comes to victims of sexual assault — believe women first — isn’t extended to us. Neither is the notion that the personal is political. Our political conclusions are dismissed as personal; our personal experiences dismissed as political.

That’s because in the rubric of identity politics, our status as women of color is canceled out by our ideas, which are labeled “conservative” — as if opposition to violent jihad, sex slavery, genital mutilation or child marriage were a matter of left or right. This not only silences us, it also puts beyond the pale of liberalism a basic concern for human rights and the individual rights of women abused in the name of Islam.

There is a real discomfort among progressives on the left with calling out Islamic extremism. Partly they fear offending members of a “minority” religion and being labeled racist, bigoted or Islamophobic. There is also the idea, which has tremendous strength on the left, that non-Western women don’t need “saving” — and that the suggestion that they do is patronizing at best. After all, the thinking goes, if women in America still earn less than men for equivalent work, who are we to criticize other cultures?

This is extreme moral relativism disguised as cultural sensitivity. And it leads good people to make excuses for the inexcusable. The silence of the Democratic senators is a reflection of contemporary cultural pressures. Call it identity politics, moral relativism or political correctness — it is shortsighted, dangerous and, ultimately, a betrayal of liberal values.

The hard truth is that there are fundamental conflicts between universal human rights and the principle of Shariah, or Islamic law, which holds that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man’s; between freedom of religion and the Islamist idea that artists, writers, poets and bloggers should be subject to blasphemy laws; between secular governance and the Islamist goal of a caliphate; between United States law and Islamist promotion of polygamy, child marriage and marital rape; and between freedom of thought and the methods of indoctrination, or dawa, with which Islamists propagate their ideas.

Defending universal principles against Islamist ideology, not denying that these conflicts exist, is surely the first step in a fight whose natural leaders in Washington should be women like Kamala Harris and Claire McCaskill — both outspoken advocates for American women.

We believe feminism is for everyone. Our goals — not least the equality of the sexes — are deeply liberal. We know these are values that the Democratic senators at our hearing share. Will they find their voices and join us in opposing Islamist extremism and its war on women?”

According to Aischa, child-bride of Prophet Muhammad, the Qur’an as written by the Third Caliph, Uthman, was extremely sexist. Less sexist version of Muhammad’s message were destroyed under the order of Uthman, who ended assassinated as a result. Aischa fought with an army for her anti-sexist views, but, differently from European women, she was defeated at the famous “Battle of the Camel”.

***

Straight out of Qur’an and Hadith:

To divorce a wife, a Muslim man can just say “Talaq, talaq, talaq” That’s called the instant divorce law. It was controversial even in Muhammad’s times, and Muhammad criticized it. However, according to the Hadith, the Prophet practiced it. Even the New York Times recognizes this instant divorce law is a problem today, all the way to India.

All the more as, according to Hadith, “irrevocable divorce” does not allow for any sort of allowance or remittance.

The Qur’an Surah An-Nisa, 34 defines the relations between husbands and wives. Quran 4:34 reads:

Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and beat them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

— Qur’an 4:34, [5]

Some of the relation of Islam with sexism is nearly hilarious. Here is a Hadith showing how much of lala land Islam is: “Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Zam’a: The Prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.”

However, a bit of discipline is good for the ladies:

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 7:62:132 see also Sahih al-Bukhari, 8:73:68

In Sunni Hadith, violent sexism rules, and is reiterated ad nauseam. here is an example: “Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife. — Sunan Abu Dawood, 11:2142”

The unending litany of verbal and “Sharia legal” abuse hurled at women in Islam sacred texts is properly astounding. It goes against human nature so deeply that any civilization submitting to it can only fail.

***

We Already Knew This, But A Slightly Different Angle Is Instructive:

Making women uneducated and submissive make them stupid, and thus, so for their children, and the grown-ups who follow, insuring a vicious circle of less than optimal intelligence and culture. Thus Islam’s sexism is self-reproducing, and self-defeating.

Islam is not just in contradiction with the present (“Western”) civilization, and the United Nations Charter (whose foundation is basically:”All Persons Are Created Equal”). Any preaching otherwise should be outlawed. Islam is also in contradiction with human ethology itself, the core of human strength, as human sexual equality is a genetic given.

But so, of course, is plutocracy. In Islam, plutocracy sees an enemy of its enemy, humanity. So they are friends!

Patrice Ayme’

[The integral version of the text above from Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Arsa Nomani was published first in the New York Times under the title:“Kamala Harris, Speak Up. Don’t Be Silent on Women’s Rights.” I spent an hour trying to persuade the New York Times to publish my comment, it replied by interfering with my computer, erasing text. Then the New York Times changed the title to “They Brushed off Kamala Harris, Then She Brushed Us Off.” So, according to the New York Times, the text of the two ladies above is not about women’s rights anymore, but all about ladies “brushing off” each other.

A fight for human rights oppressed by a misogynistic ideology has been replaced, in its title, according to the New York Times, by cat ladies fighting for supremacy. Thus the New York Times manipulate minds, one moody detail at a time… All the comments are also doctored, selected, to present a biased view of what We The People are thinking. British tabloids have used that method for decade, hence Brexit. The New York Times is ever more brazen in its practice of it.]