Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk


I belong to a Yahoo Group that calls itself the Conservative Christian Counselors. The group has created an acronym for their group which is “ccpga.” I am ashamed to say that I am at a loss to how the group derived the acronym “ccpga” from Conservative Christian Counselors. I’m guilty of being an off and on again participator over a number of years and I have never paid much attention to anything but the posted messages which are quite good most of the time.

This Yahoo group is listed as “restricted” so there is a good chance you will not be able to read any of those posts without becoming an approved member. The link I provided above is to the about page.

So, what the heck with the minor group history?

A prominent posting member that goes by the Pseudonym Beowulf found a David Bukay who is a professor at a university in Israel. The original post, “Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk,” was posted at Modern Diplomacy on January 27. This is the version I am cross posting here. Beowulf cross posted the ccpga version on February 7.

JRH 2/7/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Islam and Hatred: Why the Free World Civilization is at Risk

 

By David Bukay

January 27, 2016

Modern Diplomacy in New Social Compact

Hatred to the other is one of the main sources as much as commandments in Islam. It is this old inherent religiously commanded hatred that is behind the terrorism of Jihad against the infidels and the criminality of the Muslims in so many places and regions around the world.

Hatred cannot be detached from Islam because it is in fact indoctrinated and motivated by Islam. The Nazi era has taught us that hatred is one of the most important policies that lead to apartheid and genocide. The Qur’an teaches hatred and commands to hate the infidels. The Islamic Caliphate State (ICS) is proving it time and again, even by destroying the archeological sites, the wonders of the old Middle East.

Consider the elements that define hate speech: drawing a moral comparison based on distinction between one’s own identity group and those outside of it; dehumanization of other groups and insistence of personal superiority against these groups; and a call to all kind of atrocities perpetuated against other groups.

The Islamic Shari‘ah qualifies as hate religion on each and every count by which we define hate speech. There is no other religion that draws such sharp distinction between its community of believers and others outside Islam.

a) Its message inspires loathing for others and the Qur’an mandates the superiority of Islam by all means. According to Muslim exegetes, there are seven major features of the superiority of Arab-Muslims over others, based on the Qur’an, among them, they are the best Ummah ever brought forth to men, bidding good (Ma’rûf) and forbidding evil (Munkar); they hold the pillar of superiority over all other world communities; and they will wage war on the people of error and the Anti-Christ.

b) It draws a deep distinction between Muslims and the others, called Kuffār, and it incites to violence and hatred. Islam is ethnocentric religion and political culture. It differentiates the world between Dār al-Islām against Dār al-Harb; between the good and righteous society and the bad and unclean society. It is Halāl against Haram; it is the right against wrong; it is the pious against the evil-doers; it is Paradise or Hell. There is nothing positive in the Qur’an and the Sharī‘ah for non-Muslims who are all infidels.

c) It perpetuate legitimizes atrocities and butchering of non-Muslims whenever they are. There are 527 verses that are intolerant to the infidels, and 109 verses calling on Muslims to make war on the infidels. As Muslims see it, Islam is for everyone in the human race and should be expanded as a winning religion, by force or persuasion, until all human beings proclaim that “there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger.” Jihad is universally understood as war on behalf of Islam, and its merits are described plentifully in the most-respected religious works.

In ancient as much as in contemporary world, Islamic dominance is characterized by the oppression and discrimination of non-Muslims, all defined as infidels (Kuffār, Kāfirun). There are no “unbelievers” or “disbelievers” in the Qur’an and the Sharī‘ah at large but only infidels or apostates. This is not only a subjective issue, but deep categorical. ‘Unbeliever’ can get neutral in conception, ‘infidel’ is totally different. The pattern of aggressive violence and disregard for human suffering is persistent in Islam and reflects the message of the Qur’an, which is one of superiority, loath and hatred. 64 percent of the Qur’an and 61 percent of the overall Sharī‘ah is related to the infidels, and there is not even one positive stand in favor for them. They are all an integral part of the abode of Hellfire.

The Kuffār are the vilest animals and beasts; the worst of creatures and demons, perverted transgressors and partners of Satan (al-‘Imrān, 3:82, 110; al-Nisā’, 4:76; al-A‘arāf, 7:176; al-Anfāl, 8:55). The Kuffār are to be beheaded. Muslims must strike off their heads and their fingertips (al-Anfāl, 8:12; Muhammad, 47:4). The Kuffār are to be terrorized. Muslims are to cast terror into the hearts of the infidels, their abode is the Hell-fire (al-‘Imrān, 3:151; al-Anfāl, 8:12, 8:60; al-Ahzāb, 33:26; al-Hashr, 59:2). The Kuffār are to be annihilated until the religion of Allah is the only one. They are to be killed wherever they are found, since persecution is severer than slaughter. Muslims are obliged to slay them until there is no persecution, and religion is only Allah’s. This commandment includes not only the infidels and the idolaters, but also the hypocrites and the polytheists, as their abode is Hell-fire (al-Baqarah, 2:191; 193; al-Nisā’, 4:89, 91; al-Anfāl, 8:39; al-Taubah, 9:36, 73, 111, 123; al-Tahrīm, 66:9). The Kuffār are to be crucified (al-Mā’idah, 5:33). They are the constant fuel of the fire burn in Hell (al-‘Imrān, 3:10; al-Taubah, 9:17; Ibrāhīm, 14:30; al-Nahl, 16:29; al-Anbīyā’, 21:98; al-Hajj, 22:19; al-Ahzāb, 33:64; al-Saff, 61:11; al-Mû’min, 48:13). “Hostility and hate” exist between the Kuffār and the Muslim believers forever until they “believe in Allah alone” (al-Taubah, 9:28, 32, 69).

The Egyptian intellectual Sami al-Rabbā’ has elaborated:

If you say that Islam is a violent faith, you are accused of being anti-Islam and “Islamophobe”. Yet, the main of the Qur’an are passages full of incitement and hatred, Jihad-killing and war-mongering.

The educational system is the main source of indoctrination and socialization to hatred and it works almost as a production line. The Muslims start the politics of hatred and Jihad ideology from infancy. The children learn to hate before everything, even without knowing why: at home, in the mosques and in schools, Madāris. They hate the infidels, because they are what they are, and not because they know anything about them. The hatred is in their drink and foods, and this fuel directs and motivates the massacres and lynches that are so pervasive around the world.

The contemporary radicalization of the Muslim youth, the “third generation” Muslims living in the Western world is enormous and alarming. A report by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalization in London claims that “European jihadists in Syria are more numerous than official statistics indicate. Indeed, they point to the existence of entire French-speaking and German-speaking brigades in the Aleppo region.” Many of them are radicalizing through the Internet extremist websites and YouTube videos; others are led by imams at mosques; and others, converted to Islam, men and women, volunteer for sex Jihad.

Sa’id al-Hamad, a liberal thinker from Bahrain

The ‘culture of backwardness’ dominates the Arab world, and it includes ‘culture of terrorism,’ which adopts beheading and lynching people; and the ‘culture of hatred,’ which propagates in the minds and consciousness of the youth deep hatred to the world.

Islam’s conceptions and behavior

Muslim groups and organizations are violent politically and fanatic religiously. Muslims cover their activities by using religious argumentations as an excuse and motivation to their behavior towards the other. Whether they butcher and cut-off heads of infidels of the West; or terrorize their own Muslim believers, Sunnis and Shiites; or massacre minorities of all kinds, mainly Christians; or when they establish Islamic institutions and mosques in Western states; or when they commit acts of horrible homicide bombings and terrorism; or when they conquer, Islamize and Arabize vast territories; or when they commit ethnic cleansing, apartheid and mass holocausts — for example, the Hindus and the Armenians in the past, and Christians today; or when they coerce and intimidate, Muslims always claim they do it in defense.

Another astonishing issue is that Muslim exegetes, preachers and propagators speak only in complete and absolute terms about their religion’s values, without the slightest self-criticism and doubts: ‘Islam is absolutely a religion of peace and harmony;’ ‘Islam is totally devoted to promote peace around the world;’ ‘Jihad is absolutely and totally defined in terms of defense;’ ‘aggression is used only rarely, when the Muslims have no other choice to defend their religion and their self;’ ‘there is nothing in Islam that is against tolerance, democracy and peaceful relations;’ and ‘Islam tolerates all other religions, acts peacefully and preaches for human cooperation and collaboration.’

One finds these slogans abound in books, article, and media resources. It is so pervasive and so totalistic that it becomes almost impossible to argue and to debate with them. Their cultural conceptions; their totalistic approach as being always and under all circumstances the righteous side; and their ethnocentric conceptions make it impossible to argue with them in rational and according to the ‘golden rule’ values.

However, when one elaborates the many verses of the Qur’an and the commandments of the Shrī’ah, he immediately attacked and mocked off as an ignorant of Islam and dismissed as being biased evil Muslim: “you don’t understand the real true meaning of the scriptures;” “you don’t know Arabic;” “you hate Islam and prove Islamophobia exists;” “you prove by your words the white man discrimination of imperialism and colonialism;” “you are racist and oppressive;” and other accusations according to Arab-Islamic imagination and aggression.

What Arab-Islamic history and contemporary tell us?

This is the political language of the Muslim scholars, spokesmen and propagators. Yet, one has to recall the following: the origin of the Arabs and Islam is in Arabian Peninsula. All the vast areas that have been conquered from year 632 on are the result of one of the deepest colonialist and imperialist occupation characterized by process of Arabization and Islamization of the occupied territories. The Middle East was mainly Pharaonic; Phoenician; Babilonian; Ugarit; Chaldean; Jewish, and Berber in North-Africa. Iran was Sassanid; Turkey, Afghanistan and Pakistan were Buddhist. Indeed, Islamic occupations of the Middle East, North Africa, parts of Europe and Asia were all imperialist-colonialist of the worst kind, as they have constantly become Arabized and Islamized.

The invasion out of Arabia was conducted under political ideological ambitions clocked in a religious banner and as an intrinsic part of Islamic doctrine. This process of occupation ended by ethnic cleansing and deportations of the indigenous population; massacres and genocide of peoples; huge slavery by hundreds of millions; and racist policies of Apartheid.

The Palestinian sociologist, Ali ‘Issa Othman, states his conviction that

The spread of Islam was military. There is a tendency to apologize for this, and we should not. It is one of the injunctions of the Qur’an that you must fight for the spreading of Islam.

Indeed, Islam has never been a tolerant, peaceful religion. It is not intolerant as a response to other’s intolerance, but it is inherently intolerant, racist and war-mongering by itself, according to its religious doctrine. Islamic hostility that practices a policy of systematic Jihad against the other are not a modern phenomenon, but deeply rooted in the Qur’an. It has been operated systematically from the 7th century on until today.

Moreover, against the religious command to love their own fellow believers, Muslims massacre by millions other Muslims. Today, it is represented by the emergence of groups and organizations that follow the Islamic ancestors’ tradition, Salafiyah, with the following division: traditional (Salafīyah Taqlīdīyah), represented by the Muslim Brotherhood parties; Jihadi (Salafīyah Jihadīyah), represented by al-Qaeda and its regional organizations (like AQAP, AQIM, al-Shabab in Somalia, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria); and Takfīri (Salafiyah Takfīrīyah), represented the Islamic Caliphate State.

The objectives of Islamic hatred

The Qur’an makes it clear that Islam is not about universal brotherhood and cooperation, but the brotherhood of the community of believers. The Qur’an says that all other religions as such are cursed by Allah. Whoever does not believe in Muhammad and totally follow him; whoever contends with Muhammad and Islamic tenets it means heresy that deserves death. It is the nature of Islam to dominate and not to be dominated; to rule and not to be ruled; to be superior on all the infidels. The Muslim vision is clear: there is one universe, and it must be under the banner of Islam. All humanity must submit to Islam as the supreme religion.

The Islamic excuses of the past are no more relevant. The claims they revenge only at acts that are committed against them; acts that humiliate their honor and their souls; or for defense of their nation and soil; and all other sorts of fairy-tales for the consumption of Western media to publish and public opinion to impress – these excuses are no more relevant. The fact is that Muslim groups and organizations murder and butcher and operate all kinds of horrible atrocious acts of violence are exactly for political reasons under the cloak of religious issues and as a result of cultural reasoning. They wish to conquer the world, to impose their religion and culture, and they do not feel any shame or guilt remorse. From their vantage point, they are entitled to possess everything, as it is promised in the Qur’an. They have never given up the prophetic message that Islam must dominate the entire world, and they have all the patience (Sabr) in time to bring these ambitions come true.

The Saudi legal expert, Basem ‘Alem states it clearly:

As a member of the only true religion, I have a greater right to invade others in order to impose the Shari’ah, which history has proven to be the best and most just of all civilizations. This is the true meaning of Jihad. When we wage Jihad, it is not in order to convert people to Islam, but in order to liberate them from the dark slavery in which they live.

This is apparent in an interview with Ayat Allah Kamil, a Palestinian woman who had tried to carry out a suicide bombing. When asked by the Guardian journalist: “Do you have any dreams for the future?” She responded

My deep belief and wishes that the whole world becoming Islamic, a world in which we will all live in peace, joy, and harmony, all of us, human beings, animals, flowers, plants, and stones. Islam will even bring peace to vegetables and animals, the grass and the stones… And you will be able to remain Jewish, whatever you want; it doesn’t matter, but only in an Islamic world.

…and its consequences and repercussions

The Western world reaction to this reality if fear and intimidation. One of the fresh examples is the case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a victim of genital mutilation in infancy and a victim of Islamic persecution today. Now she has been subjected to yet another example of Western cowardice and hypocrisy. Brandeis University has decided not to award her an honorary degree. As Arnold Ahlert observes, Brandeis honored Desmond Tutu who was an overt anti-Semite, and asserted that the Holocaust’s gas chambers made for “a neater death” than did Apartheid. He regularly accuses the Jewish State of ethnic cleansing, and insists that Zionism has “very many parallels with racism.” Brandeis also honored the playwright Tony Kushner, despite his overt anti-Semitism for Israel. He also accused the Jewish State of ethnic cleansing, and insisted its creation “was a mistake.”

Nevertheless they have been given the honorary degree. A similar case was also the University of Haifa decision not to grant an honorary doctorate to Nobel Prize laureate Yisrael Aumann, “because of his political views,” but has awarded the extreme leftist anti-Zionist Shulamit Aloni the honorary degree without hesitation.

The question is why the academia, the media, and governments in the West, founded on liberalism and secularism, would not only refuse to counter Islamic Jihad and Da‘wah onslaught against other civilizations but even deny that Islam is not compatible with the basic values of freedoms and civil rights? The answer is surprisingly simple: because they are frightened, because they are intimidated and terrorized. They are frightened of being accused of Islamophobia and racism; they are intimidated by brutal savage forces that threaten and actually attack them; they are terrorized by anarchic and chaotic groups of ruffians; and they are paralyzed by Islam’s real intent to bring us all to its 7th century traditions and way of life. Part of them, mainly the academia and the cultural hedonists, act along these lines because they hate the west and its values and they perceive Islam as a cure to what they call ‘Western malaise;’ as they embrace sick and twisted ideologies based on neo-Bolshevism and neo-Fascism.

The best to exhibit the mired reality of this Western world’s situation is the example of the British newspaper, the Guardian’s cartoonist and head of the British Cartoonist Association, Tim Benson. Anti-Semite in profession, he often sketches horrible graphic cartoons against Israel, but never against Islam and the Palestinians. When asked about this, his answer was pure and simple: I am afraid. It means, he can draw anything against Israel, the Jews, Christianity and Buddhism, and nothing happens, but he would not dare to do that when Muslims, Arabs and Palestinians are concerned. He does not want to be persecuted like Salman Rushdie, or be butchered like Theo Van Goch [sic], to mention the few.

The academia and the media worldwide are sick, and Israeli academia and media represent a pure tragic example of this sickness, because Israel is in the forefront of the war of civilizations, the last fortified dam before the deluge. Unless these two important organs of Western society’s body that hold crucial influence on the governmental apparatus decision making stop their submission and capitulation to the forces of evil, the Western world is doomed.

Those in power are still terrified of offending Islam. Honor killing is still overwhelmingly an Islamic tradition; gender equality simply does not exist within Muslim culture and jurisprudence; women still have very few rights and are treated like beasts in Muslim states; women rape victims are punished even to death in large parts of the Middle East; and women are still forced to cover their entire bodies in dark tent. Islamic immigration wrack and havoc Western societies; and the Muslim’s third generation proves to be the most extremist and fanatic, and still Western governments appease Islam and actually even unintentionally promote its victory.

The Muslim women’s clothing is the symbol to Western world’s sick era. If “Sunlight is the best disinfectant,” then Western civilization is marching courageously to a dark era in which Islam determines the values of the future. This is a darkness era that clouds the minds of those in power in the West, as much as in the academia and the media, not to see the bright sights of Islam’s brutal onslaught of Jihad; not to hear the clear voices of Islam’s targets operated by Da‘wah; and not to smell the scent of Islamic blood-hunt that wishes to smash our freedoms and civil rights and to re-mold Western civilization according to their traditions.

This almost constitutes a perpeteum [sic?] mobile, which leads to a simple mathematics: if the number of the Islamic fanatics produced by hatred is higher than those the Free World can neutralize, it means that it is losing the war of civilizations. Indeed, the Western world’s mired situation is so intimidating that it refuses to tell even to itself that Islam is engaging in a Third World War against us, and we even do not fight back, but appease and pay protection money. What we are really dealing with is not Islamophobia, but the acute danger of Islamophilia and Islamization of the Free World’s civilization.

____________________

© 2015 Modern Diplomacy All rights reserved.

About MD

February 16, 2015

The Modern Diplomacy is a leading European opinion maker – not a pure news-switchboard. Today’s world does not need yet another avalanche of (disheartened and decontextualized) information, it needs shared experience and honestly told opinion.

Determined to voice and empower, to argue but not to impose, the MD does not rigidly guard its narrative.

Contrary to the majority of media-houses and news platforms, the MD is open to everyone coming with the firm and fair, constructive and foresighted argumentation.

Balanced geographic, political and generational participation is essential to us. You will hardly find a North Korean and an American from Pentagon sitting in the same Advisory Board as we do have in the MD.

If you ask yourself what connects an Artic polar environmentalist and a tropical country traditionalist, a young businesswoman entrepreneur from north of Europe or South Africa and the former Secretary General of the eldest European institution – Council of Europe, or what puts together a musician from New York, with a President of Constitutional Court in Europe or with a scientist from Japan, a poet and a cabinet minister – it is a honesty and authenticity that we offer – and therefore, all of them are proudly in our Board.

Islamic Jihad and the Doctrine of Abrogation


2 Korans - Muslim Lies

There is a huge doctrine in Islam that Muslim Apologists like to discount to we kafir (aka unbelievers or infidel) either as a deception knowing the Western mind would find this doctrine ridiculously unacceptable OR the typical Muslims simply don’t understand their own theology and view all criticism of Islam as blasphemy not willing to question the info provided by a Cleric. That doctrine is called abrogation.

 

A number of years ago I posted an essay written by Dr. David Bukay (Ph. D.) that I had found on PoliticalIslam.com. I titled the post “David Bukay on Islamic Abrogation,” but the essay written by Dr. Bukay was entitled “Abrogation and the Koran.” This was posted on my blog in June of 2008 so it was some time ago.

 

It is a detailed essay and I am probably doing an injustice by simplifying “Abrogation” that the doctrine takes the Quran pointing out the suras written in Mecca prior to Mohammed fleeing to Medina are abrogated or of none effect compared to the later suras written during the days of growing political and military power of Mohammed’s days of slowly taking over Medina. For example where Mohammed told his followers there is no compulsion in Islam that was Mecca, where Mohammed told his followers kill the Jews wherever you find them was in Medina.

 

Through Bill Warner of Political Islam learned another aspect of understanding Islamic Abrogation. Islam is a dualistic theology in that two opposite statements or commands can both be correct depending on the situation a Muslim or the people of Islam may face at the time. The Western mind finds it ludicrous that two opposites can be true. Either it is wrong or it is true.

 

Here we are in 2014 and I found another Counterjihad writer I admire in bringing clarity to the real of Islam in Raymond Ibrahim. Here is some more clarity on Abrogation from Ibrahim.

 

JRH 3/7/14 (Hat Tip: Beowulf – CCGPA Yahoo Group)

Please Support NCCR

*******************************************************

Islamic Jihad and the Doctrine of Abrogation

 

By Raymond Ibrahim

March 5, 2014

Raymond Ibrahim – Islam Translated

 

While other scriptures contain contradictions, the Koran is the only holy book whose commentators have evolved a doctrine to account for the very visible shifts which occur from one injunction to another. No careful reader will remain unaware of the many contradictory verses in the Koran, most specifically the way in which peaceful and tolerant verses lie almost side by side with violent and intolerant ones. The ulema were initially baffled as to which verses to codify into the Shari’a worldview—the one that states there is no coercion in religion (2:256), or the ones that command believers to fight all non-Muslims till they either convert, or at least submit, to Islam (8:39, 9:5, 9:29). To get out of this quandary, the commentators developed the doctrine of abrogation, which essentially maintains that verses revealed later in Muhammad’s career take precedence over earlier ones whenever there is a discrepancy. In order to document which verses abrogated which, a religious science devoted to the chronology of the Koran’s verses evolved (known as an-Nasikh wa’l Mansukh, the abrogater and the abrogated).

 

But why the contradiction in the first place? The standard view is that in the early years of Islam, since Muhammad and his community were far outnumbered by their infidel competitors while living next to them in Mecca, a message of peace and coexistence was in order. However, after the Muslims migrated to Medina in 622 and grew in military strength, verses inciting them to go on the offensive were slowly “revealed”—in principle, sent down from Allah—always commensurate with Islam’s growing capabilities. In juridical texts, these are categorized in stages: passivity vis-á-vis aggression; permission to fight back against aggressors; commands to fight aggressors; commands to fight all non-Muslims, whether the latter begin aggressions or not.[1] Growing Muslim might is the only variable that explains this progressive change in policy.

 

Other scholars put a gloss on this by arguing that over a twenty-two year period, the Koran was revealed piecemeal, from passive and spiritual verses to legal prescriptions and injunctions to spread the faith through jihad and conquest, simply to acclimate early Muslim converts to the duties of Islam, lest they be discouraged at the outset by the dramatic obligations that would appear in later verses.[2] Verses revealed towards the end of Muhammad’s career—such as, “Warfare is prescribed for you though you hate it”[3]—would have been out of place when warfare was actually out of the question.

 

However interpreted, the standard view on Koranic abrogation concerning war and peace verses is that when Muslims are weak and in a minority position, they should preach and behave according to the ethos of the Meccan verses (peace and tolerance); when strong, however, they should go on the offensive on the basis of what is commanded in the Medinan verses (war and conquest). The vicissitudes of Islamic history are a testimony to this dichotomy, best captured by the popular Muslim notion, based on a hadith, that, if possible, jihad should be performed by the hand (force), if not, then by the tongue (through preaching); and, if that is not possible, then with the heart or one’s intentions.[4]

 

That Islam legitimizes deceit during war is, of course, not all that astonishing; after all, as the Elizabethan writer John Lyly put it, “All’s fair in love and war.”[5] Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists—such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Thomas Hobbes—justified deceit in warfare. Deception of the enemy during war is only common sense. The crucial difference in Islam, however, is that war against the infidel is a perpetual affair—until, in the words of the Koran, “all chaos ceases, and all religion belongs to Allah.”[6] In his entry on jihad from the Encyclopaedia of Islam, Emile Tyan states: “The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily.”[7]

 

Moreover, going back to the doctrine of abrogation, Muslim scholars such as Ibn Salama (d. 1020) agree that Koran 9:5, known as ayat as-sayf or the sword verse, has abrogated some 124 of the more peaceful Meccan verses, including “every other verse in the Koran, which commands or implies anything less than a total offensive against the nonbelievers.”[8] In fact, all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence agree that “jihad is when Muslims wage war on infidels, after having called on them to embrace Islam or at least pay tribute [jizya] and live in submission, and the infidels refuse.”[9]

 

Obligatory jihad is best expressed by Islam’s dichotomized worldview that pits the realm of Islam against the realm of war. The first, dar al-Islam, is the “realm of submission,” the world where Shari’a governs; the second, dar al-Harb (the realm of war), is the non-Islamic world. A struggle continues until the realm of Islam subsumes the non-Islamic world—a perpetual affair that continues to the present day. The renowned Muslim historian and philosopher Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) clearly articulates this division:

 

In the Muslim community, jihad is a religious duty because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and the obligation to convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. The other religious groups did not have a universal mission, and the jihad was not a religious duty for them, save only for purposes of defense. But Islam is under obligation to gain power over other nations.[10]

 

#############

[Foot Notes]

 

[1] Ibn Qayyim, Tafsir, in Abd al-’Aziz bin Nasir al-Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw’ al-Kitab wa ‘s-Sunna (Riyahd: n.p., 2003), pp. 36-43.

[2] Mukaram, At-Taqiyya fil-Islam, p. 20.

[3] Koran 2: 216.

[4] Yahya bin Sharaf ad-Din an-Nawawi, An-Nawawi’s Forty Hadiths, p. 16, accessed Aug. 1, 2009.

[5] John Lyly, Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit (London, 1578), p. 236.

[6] Koran 8:39.

[7] Emile Tyan, The Encyclopedia of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1960), vol. 2, s.v. “Djihad,” pp. 538-40.

[8] David Bukay, “Peace or Jihad? Abrogation in Islam,” Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2007, pp. 3-11, f.n. 58; David S. Powers, “The Exegetical Genre nasikh al-Qur’an wa-mansukhuhu,” in Approaches to the History of the Interpretation of the Qur’an, Andrew Rippin, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), pp. 130-1.

[9] Jalil, At-Tarbiya al-Jihadiya fi Daw’ al-Kitab wa ‘ s-Sunna, p. 7.

[10] Ibn Khaldun, The Muqadimmah. An Introduction to History, Franz Rosenthal, trans. (New York: Pantheon, 1958), vol. 1, p. 473.

 

________________________

© 2014 Raymond Ibrahim

 

Raymond Ibrahim is a Middle East and Islam specialist and author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007). His writings have appeared in a variety of media, including the Los Angeles Times, Washington Times, Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst, Middle East Quarterly, World Almanac of Islamism, and Chronicle of Higher Education; he has appeared on MSNBC, Fox News, C-SPAN, PBS, Reuters, Al-Jazeera, NPR, Blaze TV, and CBN. Ibrahim regularly speaks publicly, briefs governmental agencies, provides expert testimony for Islam-related lawsuits, and testifies before Congress. He is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum, a Media Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a CBN News contributor. Ibrahim’s dual-background — born and raised in the U.S. by Coptic Egyptian parents born and raised in the Middle East — has provided him with unique advantages, from equal fluency in English and Arabic, to an equal understanding of the Western and Middle Eastern mindsets, positioning him to explain the latter to the former.

Palestinian Myths: Jerusalem is Ours


Dr. Amos Orkan’s 1991 vision for the Third Temple, which was intended to rise on the Temple Mount plaza. Photo by 'Dreamscapes: Unbuilt Jerusalem'. Fantasies of reviving the Western Wall, the sole remnant of the wall that supported the platform on which stood the ancient Temple, began to flourish with the conquest of East Jerusalem in the Six-Day War. Various proposals for construction in the Wall’s plaza piled up on the Jerusalem city engineer’s desk during the ensuing six years. http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/shavuot-2013/myriad-schemes-for-revamping-the-western-wall-plaza-have-fallen-by-the-wayside-since-1967.premium-1.523981

 

The Palestinian Authority President and the Palestinian Liberation Organization Chairman (terrorist organization) and the head of Fatah (principle terrorist organization within PLO umbrella) Mahmoud Abbas delivered a Christian message full of downright lies pertaining to Israel, Jerusalem and the Jewish Temple Mount area. Renowned scholar David Bukay refutes the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians leader by laying out the historical facts. You can believe a lie and be damned or you can believe the truth and blessed.

 

 

JRH 12/26/13 (Hat Tip: Beowulf – ccpa Yahoo Group)

Please Support NCCR

*****************************************

Palestinian Myths: Jerusalem is Ours

 

Posted by Rachel Ehrenfeld

By David Bukay

December 25th, 2013 @ 12:35AM

American Center for Democracy

 

In his preposterous Christmas greeting, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, claimed: “Jesus was a Palestinian messenger.” He also used the opportunity to deny the right of the Jews and their State of Israel, to their 3,000 year-old capital city Jerusalem. Carried away by his efforts to delegitimize the Jews and Israel, Abbas went on to say, “Our prayers are with the…mosques and churches (added emphasis) … of Jerusalem which remind the world of the Arab identity of our occupied capital.”

 

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesperson Yigal Palmor, rebuked Abbas’s “outrageous rewriting of Christian history,” suggesting “He should have read the Gospel before uttering such offensive nonsense.” Strangely, the Vatican did not rush to condemn Abbas’s outrageous declaration that Jesus (the Christian God) was a Palestinian (i.e. a Muslim, not a Jew).

 

However, we wish you a very happy celebration of the anniversary of the birth of the only Jewish settler whose right to call Bethlehem, home, has been never protested throughout the world (until now).

 

Rachel Ehrenfeld     

_  ___   ____    ____   ___  ___

Palestinian Myths: Jerusalem is Ours- Part I

By David Bukay*

 

This latest attack is part of the Palestinian effort to delegitimize the Jews rights for Israel and their 3,000-year-old capital city, Jerusalem.

 

There is the common saying: “A grain of truth is needed to make a mountain of lies believable.” However, this saying does not apply to Palestinian claims. However, they rely on this saying to help sell the absolute fabrications and distortions of claiming Jerusalem as part their made up historical lore. For it is hard for average people, international media, world public opinion, and states’ leadership to grasp and internalize the totality of nothing relating the Palestinians’ claims and pretentions.

 

The Palestinian legends and myths, however, are tightly tied to the development of an intense propaganda machinery of denial of any Jewish sanctity for Jerusalem, as if “Jerusalem has always been under Muslim sovereignty from time immemorial.” The Palestinians do not have any historical, religious, political, or cultural connection to Jerusalem. Jerusalem is not and never has been part of their history. The mosques erected on the Temple mount during the Umayyad Dynasty did not achieve any importance in other Muslim dynasties until the 20th century.

 

Yet, two important facts combined together can be clearly discerned: first, that for the Jewish diaspora, from 135 AD onward, the Land of Israel has never become a politically independent entity with a distinct identity as a nation; and, second, that Jerusalem was never the capital city of any empire or any independent regime or nation, and was not even ever an important city to any of the empires that controlled it besides the Jews. There have been only three recognized national, politically independent entities in the history of the Land of Israel: the First Jewish Kingdom, from the conquest of Canaan (1400 BCE – 586 BCE); the Second Jewish kingdom, until the end of the Bar Kochva revolt (538 BCE – 135 AD); and the State of Israel, since 1948. This also applies to Jerusalem, which had been the capital of the First and Second Jewish Kingdoms, and now the capital of the State of Israel.

 

Never bothered by the facts and well trained to twist them, Abbas (Abu-Mazen), on February 26, 2012, in Qatar’s International Conference on Jerusalem, accused Israel of Judaizing al-Quds, while obliterating its Palestinian character. Moreover, he declared that Israel is robbing Jerusalem of its historical and religious Palestinian character and actively pursuing this goal on three fronts: First, by changing the character and architectural structure of al-Quds from its cultural and historical Palestinian roots. Second, by employing processes of ethnic cleansing of Palestinian citizens and sites, begun in 1967, with unprecedented acceleration in the construction of settlements and the demolishing of Palestinian homes with their historical symbolism. Third, by impoverishing al-Quds, because throughout history it has always represented a center of thriving of the Palestinian people.

 

Jerusalem in Palestinian Propaganda

 

This theme of an old historical Palestinian Jerusalem that belongs solely to the old historical Palestinian people is a central theme in the mythical propaganda, which is based on pure lies, total fabrications and factual distortions repeatedly released by the Palestinians. According the Mufti of Jerusalem, Israel forges and falsifies the basic facts and history of Jerusalem which belongs solely to Islam and the Palestinians. Israel is said to steal the original Palestinian identity of Jerusalem and its cultural heritage. This theme is reiterated in the Palestinian media which claims Jerusalem to be the religious, political, and spiritual capital of Palestine. As such, Israel has no rights to Jerusalem — not religiously, not legally, not politically, and not historically. Everything in Jerusalem is Palestinian in its purest origin. Jerusalem has been the historical, religious, cultural, and scientific capital of the Palestinians from time immemorial, the center of the Islamic world, and the focus of world civilization.

 

 

The Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian Imams frequently use lies and venomous libel terminology to deliver inflammatory sermons to incite its people. Israel is accused of acting relentlessly to destroy the city’s culture and history by erasing the city’s Arab, Islamic, and Christian historical monuments. Other accusations against Israel, referred to as “the occupation authority,” include “ethnic cleansing”; “Judaizing” of Jerusalem—replacing its Arab population with Jews; infesting Arab neighborhoods with super aggressive rats; and systematic distribution of addictive drugs to its Arab population. They claim that Arab Jebusite king Malkizedeq built Jerusalem, as the most glorious place in the world, the closest to the kingdom of Allah, that it was always populated by pure Arab Palestinians. There is nothing Jewish in the city whatsoever.  Moreover, they claim that any mention in the Bible to Jerusalem as the capital of Israel is a deliberate falsification.

 

Furthermore, archeological relics are said to deny Jewish history in Palestinian Jerusalem. Not only is there refutation of the Jewish Temple from an archaeological perspective, but Jerusalem as a whole is denied any Jewish roots. Dr. Marwan Abu-Khalaf, director of the Archaeological Institute at Al-Quds University argues that:

 

“The archaeological treasures in Jerusalem emphasize the depth of the city’s heritage and history; they emphasize its Arabness and refute the Israeli claims that it is a Jewish city… It is known that perhaps under every stone and in every corner, on every street and at every turn in Jerusalem there are relics. These relics say, ‘We are Arab, we are Muslim, we are Christian.’”

 

Another Palestinian scholar made the following claims:

 

“Israel not only steals the land, but also the history of Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the capital of Arab civilization… Jerusalem is the religious, historical, cultural and scientific capital of the Palestinian people in particular and of the Arab nation in general. It is the pinnacle of civilizations of the entire world. When the Arab Jebusite king Malkizedeq built the city of Jerusalem, naming it Jebus and designating it the capital of his country six thousand years ago, none of the world’s capitals existed yet… The invaders who steal the city’s geography, are trying to also steal its history.”

 

He, who wishes to realize how Muslim scholars twist scientific truths and invent legends, is encouraged to read Dr. Marwan Abu Khalaf:

 

“The fadā’il al-Quds literature may have existed from the time of the Prophet and continued to be transmitted in the Umayyad and later Islamic periods… The Islamization of Jerusalem occurred in the first year A.H. (620 A.D.), the year when Allah ordered Muslims to face the city as their first Qibla, and when the night journey and ascension to heaven took place.”

 

Sheikh Kamal Rian of the Israeli Islamic Movement has taken an even more extreme approach, asserting that the al-Aqsa Mosque is more sacred than al-Medina’s because it is mentioned in the Qur’ān. It is the closest point between Earth and Heaven, providing the only direct connection and the entrance to heaven. The Qur’an was revealed to Muhammad in Mecca, and Muhammad ascended to Heaven in al-Aqsa.

 

Yet, the twisted facts reach the highest peak in the Palestinian claim that the al-Aqsa Mosque is the entire Jerusalem. Therefore, Jerusalem in its entirety is Islamic.

 

A collection of similar claims demonstrates the absurdity of the lies: Abraham was not a Jew; the Jews never lived in ancient Israel; the Jews never had any connection to Jerusalem; Jerusalem was never a Jewish city; there never was a Jewish Temple in Jerusalem; the Western Wall is not a Jewish holy site; the Tombs of Rachel and Joseph are actually Muslim sites.

 

Recently, a new trend cherishes Jerusalem’s (made up) place in the Palestinians’ collective national memory, thus imitating the two-thousand-year-old Jewish affirmation of allegiance to Jerusalem:  ”If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, O Jerusalem, let my tongue cleave to roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.” (Psalms, 137:5-6).

 

To better indoctrinate the Arab/Muslim population, Palestinian television has produced a video clip saying: “Forget I my right arm; forget I my left arm; forget I the light of the eye and the cries of the songs — if I forget Jerusalem.” It is followed by the Friday sermon of the Palestinian minister for religious affairs: “Without Jerusalem as the capital of the Palestinian state, as it was along the entire history, there will be no peace.”

 

The Legendary Jewish Temple

 

Palestinian propaganda has always aimed at denying the Jewish Temple’s location in Jerusalem. The PA’s Mufti, ‘Ikrima Sabri, declared that the Jewish Temple was in Nablus or perhaps Bethlehem, and that al-Aqsa predates the Jewish antiquities. Arafat claimed that the Jews “consider Hebron to be holier than Jerusalem.” Indeed, Dennis Ross attributed much of the Camp David failure to Yasser Arafat, who not only repeated “old mythologies” but invented “a new one … [that] the Temple did not exist in Jerusalem, but in Nablus.” Arafat told Clinton: “I am a religious man, and I will not allow it to be written of me [in history] that I have … confirmed the existence of the so-called Temple underneath the mountain.” However, later on he went even further in his denial of Jewish history, saying that not only had the Jewish Temple never existed in Jerusalem, but that it had never existed anywhere in Palestine.

 

Sheikh Muhammad Husayn, the director of the al-Aqsa Mosque, asserted that the Jews “claim that the al-Aqsa Mosque was built over the ruins of the alleged Temple … This meant to erase the Islamic culture and to replace it with their alleged culture … This is a place for Muslims, only Muslims. There is no Temple here, only al-Aqsa Mosque and the Qubat al-Sakhrā‘ (Dome of the Rock).”

 

This denial strategy is exemplified by Saleh Rafat of the PLO Executive Committee:

 

“We revive the Palestinian heritage and cling to it in order to counter all of the attempts by the Israeli occupation to steal the national heritage and to falsify it with the claim that it is their heritage… Every part of our heritage in our land, they claim is their heritage – even the tunnels they are trying to dig beneath the al-Aqsa Mosque… The Israelis claim that they are seeking an alleged Temple.”

 

The denial of the Jewish Temple is typically expressed through the use of the word al-Maz’ûm (alleged). The main argument is that no proof of the Temple’s existence has ever been found. An editorial in al-Hayat al-Jadidah in December 2011 is indicative of this theme that the “Jewish Temple” is a big lie, a pure Jewish invention. Mahmud Abbas and all the heads of the PA leadership used the term “Alleged Temple” almost 100 times in the years 2011-2, with their ongoing campaign to deny and to reject any traces of Jerusalem’s Jewish history. Abbas has declared:

 

“Israel’s purpose is to achieve its black goals: destroying the al-Aqsa Mosque, building its ‘Alleged Temple,’ taking over the Muslim and Christian holy sites, and destroying Jerusalem’s institutions in order to empty it, uproot its residents, and continue its occupation and Judaization… all of Israel’s archeological digs and tunnels… will not change the reality of the city… and will not create a Jewish right based on fantasy and legends… There will be no peace, security, or stability unless the occupation will be evacuated from our holy city and the eternal capital of our state.”

 

On many other occasions he stated:

 

“Jerusalem only has Islamic and Christian history; Israel’s ‘Judaization’ is stealing Jerusalem’s cultural, human, and Islamic-Christian religious history… Israel is creating artificial heritage with a Jewish spirit at the expense of Jerusalem’s true and authentic identity, as an Arab, Islamic and Christian city.”

 

Likewise, Jamal Amar, an archaeologist at bir Zeit University, has denied the existence of an ancient Jewish Temple, calling it “myth” and using the word “the alleged temple.” He emphasized the occupation’s feverish attempts to find antiquities, as architectural testimony, or any other sort of proof to support their hectic efforts to rebuild the alleged Temple, but claimed that all of their findings were from the Arab and Islamic periods, especially the Umayyad and Abbasid period, up to the Ottoman period.

 

Similarly, PA Minister of Religious Affairs Mahmoud al-Habbash announced:

 

“Jerusalem is the key to peace, and Jerusalem can ignite a thousand and one wars. Unless the issue of Jerusalem is solved, so that it returns to its owners; unless Jerusalem will be Palestinian, as it was throughout history, the capital of the Palestinian state and the capital of the Palestinian people, there is no peace. There is no peace without Jerusalem… The term ‘war’ cannot be erased from the lexicon of this region as long as Jerusalem is occupied,… Jerusalem has to return to its owners. And we are its only owners.”

 

And Walid Awad, former Director of Foreign Publications of the PA Ministry of Information, stated: “The fact is that almost thirty years of excavations did not reveal anything Jewish… Jerusalem is not a Jewish city, despite the biblical myth implanted in some minds… This is the greatest historic crime of forgery.”

 

The following propaganda is constantly promoted on Palestinian television:

 

“There is a view that where Masjid al-Aqsa stands was the Holy of Holies of the fictitious Temple. This is merely an illusion. There is no remnant of it. It’s a myth. A story of no value… after 60 years of digging, they have found nothing at all. Not a water jug, not a coin, not any earthen vessel, no bronze weapons, no piece of metal, absolutely nothing of this myth, because it is a myth and a lie. This digging has not left a single meter unturned, but it has achieved absolutely nothing.”

 

`Ikrima Sabri, the PA Mufti of Jerusalem, reiterated the notion: “There is not even the smallest indication of the existence of a Jewish Temple…in the whole city there is not even a single stone indicating Jewish history.” Jarar al Qidwa, former advisor on educational affairs to Arafat, concurred: “Solomon’s Temple, I believe, was built by the Canaanites… when our Canaanite forefathers came to Palestine; they built the Temple … in Jerusalem.” Taysir Tamimi, PA chief religious official also agreed:

 

“I know of Muslim and Christian holy sites. I don’t know of any Jewish holy sites in it… Israel has been excavating since 1967 in search of remains of their Temple or their fictitious Jewish history.”

 

The Western Wall

 

Not surprisingly, the Palestinians claim that the Western wall has nothing to do with Judaism, and that the Jews refer to the Western Wall in a “false and fraudulent way,” because it is the al-Buraq Wall only, located in the Mughrabi Quarter. `Ikrima Sabri, the PA’s mufti, described the Western Wall as “just a fence belonging to the Muslim holy site” and repeated the oft-heard declaration that “there is not a single stone in the Wailing Wall relating to Jewish history.” It is said that Jews have no connection to any part of the Temple Mount, including the Western Wall, and that the al-Buraq Wall and its plaza are Muslim religious property. As such, the Jews cannot legitimately claim this wall, either religiously or historically.

 

In a study published by the PA Ministry of Information in November 2010, al-Mutawakil Taha wrote:

 

“The Zionist occupation falsely and unjustly claims that it owns this wall, which it calls the Western Wall or Kotel… this wall was never part of the so-called Temple Mount, but Muslim tolerance allowed the Jews to stand in front of it and weep over its destruction… no Muslim or Arab or Palestinian had the right to give up one stone of al-Buraq Wall or other religious sites.”

 

Israel Wishes to Destroy al-Aqsa

 

Israel’s actions in Jerusalem and archeological excavation near al-Aqsa are viewed as part of a satanic plot, an increasing Israeli madness aimed at destroying the al-Aqsa mosque in order to establish the alleged Temple, claim the Palestinians. They go on claiming Israel digs tunnels beneath as part of “building a Jewish city underground at the expense of the old city, and its historic and holy sites… The occupation continues to pursue the excavations until it reaches its grand and dangerous goal of destroying the mosque… The al-Aqsa Mosque and the archaeological artifacts, religious structures and holy sites it houses are all under a serious threat of collapse at any moment.”

 

The Palestinians fabricate stories they use to accuse Israel of a deliberate effort to destroy al-Aqsa and to erect the Jewish Temple in its stead. They go on to claim that Israel is constructing a bridge in order to allow more than 5,000 soldiers in armored forces to enter the platform of the al-Aqsa Mosque in their failed attempts to look for their Temple, which they falsely claim existed. This bridge can hold hundreds of soldiers, police officers and vehicles, strategically placed to allow Israeli forces to raid the al-Aqsa Mosque. Moreover, “Israel is stationing missile launchers in the Old City in occupied Jerusalem for bombarding al-Aqsa mosque with missile attacks. The Occupation has closed the city’s gates to Muslims and Christians and is making the city into a Jewish stronghold.”

 

For the Palestinians, the result is clear, as put by Yasser Arafat: “I will not agree to any Israeli sovereign presence in Jerusalem, and “there is nothing to negotiate about and compromise on when it comes to Jerusalem.” In 2000′s Camp David Convention, Arafat demanded sovereignty over “Jerusalem in its entirety, entirety, entirety.” He reiterated that “al-Quds is in the innermost of the feeling of our people and the feeling of all Arabs, Muslims, and Christians in the world.” Jerusalem has become the center of the Palestinian cause, a casus-belli that “no Palestinian can give up.”

___________________________________

* David Bukay is Professor of Middle East Studies at the School of Political Sciences, University of Haifa. He is the author of Muhammad’s Monsters (2004); Yasser Arafat, the Politics of Paranoia (2005); From Muhammad to Bin Laden (2007); Crossovers: anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism (2010), and has published numerous articles, in referee journals, books and the internet.

 

Copyright © 2013 | The American Center for Democracy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Your contribution is tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.