The Factuals versus the OABS (Old Age BullShit)

Discussion in 'Memeperplexed' started by admin, Oct 23, 2014.

  1. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    3,226 Guide to Understanding Islam

    What does the Religion of Peace Teach About...

    Question: Does the Quran really contain dozens of verses promoting violence?

    Summary Answer:

    The Quran contains at least 109 verses that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule. Some are quite graphic, with commands to chop off heads and fingers and kill infidels wherever they may be hiding. Muslims who do not join the fight are called 'hypocrites' and warned that Allah will send them to Hell if they do not join the slaughter.
    Unlike nearly all of the Old Testament verses of violence, the verses of violence in the Quran are mostly open-ended, meaning that they are not restrained by the historical context of the surrounding text. They are part of the eternal, unchanging word of Allah, and just as relevant or subject to interpretation as anything else in the Quran.
    The context of violent passages is more ambiguous than might be expected of a perfect book from a loving God; however this works both ways. Most of today's Muslims exercise a personal choice to interpret their holy book's call to arms according to their own moral preconceptions about justifiable violence. Apologists cater to their preferences with tenuous arguments that gloss over historical fact and generally do not stand up to scrutiny. Still, it is important to note that the problem is not bad people, but bad ideology.
    Unfortunately, there are very few verses of tolerance and peace to abrogate or even balance out the many that call for nonbelievers to be fought and subdued until they either accept humiliation, convert to Islam, or are killed. Muhammad's own martial legacy - and that of his companions - along with the remarkable stress on violence found in the Quran have produced a trail of blood and tears across world history.

    The Quran:

    Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...

    but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

    Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief or unrest] is worse than killing...
    but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The verse prior to this (190) refers to "fighting for the cause of Allah those who fight you" leading some to believe that the entire passage refers to a defensive war in which Muslims are defending their homes and families. The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, however, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). Verse 190 thus means to fight those who offer resistance to Allah's rule (ie. Muslim conquest). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is disingenuous (the actual Arabic words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The word used instead, "fitna", can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. This is certainly what is meant in this context since the violence is explicitly commissioned "until religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

    Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

    Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

    Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

    Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

    Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

    Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

    Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

    Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward " This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is this Arabic word (mujahiduna) used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad, which would not make sense if it meant an internal struggle). According to the verse, Allah will allow the disabled into Paradise, but will provide a larger reward to those who are able to kill others in his cause.

    Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

    Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

    Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

    Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

    Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

    Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."

    Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."

    Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

    Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

    Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

    Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims.

    Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.

    Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. Verse 9:33 tells Muslims that Allah has charted them to make Islam "superior over all religions." This chapter was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

    Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

    Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

    Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).

    Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

    Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."

    Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?

    Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

    Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).

    Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)

    Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

    Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

    Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.

    Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost." Those who reject Allah are to be killed in Jihad. The wounded are to be held captive for ransom. The only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test.

    Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"

    Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

    Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. This verse tells Muslims that there are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' to describe Hell in over 25 other verses including 65:10, 40:46 and 50:26..

    Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

    Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.

    Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

    Other verses calling Muslims to Jihad can be found here at

    From the Hadith:

    Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

    Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

    Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.

    Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

    Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)

    Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious

    Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

    Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

    Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

    Bukhari (52:73) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."

    Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."

    Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."

    Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

    Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"

    Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."

    Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."

    Bukhari 1:35 "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)."

    Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

    Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

    Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.

    Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

    Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.

    Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

    Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship." One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.

    Additional Notes:

    Other than the fact that Muslims haven't killed every non-Muslim under their domain, there is very little else that they can point to as proof that theirs is a peaceful, tolerant religion. Where Islam is dominant (as in the Middle East and Pakistan) religious minorities suffer brutal persecution with little resistance. Where Islam is in the minority (as in Thailand, the Philippines and Europe) there is the threat of violence if Muslim demands are not met. Either situation seems to provide a justification for religious terrorism, which is persistent and endemic to Islamic fundamentalism.

    The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. The example of Muhammad is that Islam is a religion of peace when Muslims do not have the power and numbers on their side. Once they do, things change.

    Many Muslims are peaceful and do not want to believe what the Quran really says. They prefer a more narrow interpretation that is closer to the Judeo-Christian ethic. Some just ignore harsher passages. Others reach for "textual context" across different suras to subjectively mitigate these verses with others so that the message fits their personal moral preferences. Although the Quran itself claims to be clear and complete, these apologists speak of the "risks" of trying to interpret verses without their "assistance."

    The violent verses of the Quran have played a key role in very real massacre and genocide. This includes the brutal slaughter of tens of millions of Hindus for five centuries beginning around 1000 AD with Mahmud of Ghazni's bloody conquest. Both he and the later Tamerlane (Islam's Genghis Khan) slaughtered an untold number merely for defending their temples from destruction. Buddhism was very nearly wiped off the Indian subcontinent. Judaism and Christianity met the same fate (albeit more slowly) in areas conquered by Muslim armies, including the Middle East, North Africa and parts of Europe, including today's Turkey. Zoroastrianism, the ancient religion of a proud Persian people is despised by Muslims and barely survives in modern Iran.

    Violence is so ingrained in Islam that it has never really stopped being at war, either with other religions or with itself.

    Muhammad was a military leader, laying siege to towns, massacring the men, raping their women, enslaving their children, and taking the property of others as his own. On several occasions he rejected offers of surrender from the besieged inhabitants and even butchered captives. He inspired his followers to battle when they did not feel it was right to fight, promising them slaves and booty if they did and threatening them with Hell if they did not. Muhammad allowed his men to rape traumatized women captured in battle, usually on the very day their husbands and family members were slaughtered.

    It is important to emphasize that, for the most part, Muslim armies waged aggressive campaigns, and the religion's most dramatic military conquests were made by the actual companions of Muhammad in the decades following his death.

    The early Islamic principle of warfare was that the civilian population of a town was to be destroyed (ie. men executed, women and children taken as slaves) if they defended themselves and resisted Islamic hegemony. Although modern apologists often claim that Muslims are only supposed to "attack in self-defense", this oxymoron is flatly contradicted by the accounts of Islamic historians and others that go back to the time of Muhammad.

    Some modern-day scholars are more candid than others. One of the most respected Sunni theologians is al-Qaradawi, who justifies terror attacks against Western targets by noting that there is no such thing as a civilian population in a time of war:

    "It has been determined by Islamic law that the blood and property of people of Dar Al—Harb [ie. non-Muslim people who resist Islamic conquest] is not protected... In modern war, all of society, with all its classes and ethnic groups, is mobilized to participate in the war, to aid its continuation, and to provide it with the material and human fuel required for it to assure the victory of the state fighting its enemies. Every citizen in society must take upon himself a role in the effort to provide for the battle. The entire domestic front, including professionals, laborers, and industrialists, stands behind the fighting army, even if it does not bear arms."

    Consider the example of the Qurayza Jews, who were completely obliterated only five years after Muhammad arrived in Medina. Their leader opted to stay neutral when their town was besieged by a Meccan army that was sent to take revenge for Muhammad's deadly caravan raids. The tribe killed no one from either side and even surrendered peacefully to Muhammad after the Meccans had been turned back. Yet the prophet of Islam had every male member of the Qurayza beheaded, and every woman and child enslaved, even raping one of the captives himself (what Muslim apologists might refer to as "same day marriage").

    One of Islam's most revered modern scholars, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, openly sanctions offensive Jihad: "In the Jihad which you are seeking, you look for the enemy and invade him. This type of Jihad takes place only when the Islamic state is invading other [countries] in order to spread the word of Islam and to remove obstacles standing in its way." Elsewhere, he notes: "Islam has the right to take the initiative…this is God’s religion and it is for the whole world. It has the right to destroy all obstacles in the form of institutions and traditions … it attacks institutions and traditions to release human beings from their poisonous influences, which distort human nature and curtail human freedom. Those who say that Islamic Jihad was merely for the defense of the 'homeland of Islam' diminish the greatness of the Islamic way of life."

    The widely respected Dictionary of Islam defines Jihad as "A religious war with those who are unbelievers in the mission of Muhammad. It is an incumbent religious duty, established in the Qur'an and in the Traditions as a divine institution, and enjoined specially for the purpose of advancing Islam and of repelling evil from Muslims…[Quoting from the Hanafi school, Hedaya, 2, 141.], "The destruction of the sword is incurred by infidels, although they be not the first aggressors, as appears from various passages in the traditions which are generally received to this effect."

    Dr. Salah al-Sawy, the chief member of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America, stated in 2009 that "the Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time," tacitly affirming the legitimacy of violence for the cause of Islamic rule - bound only by the capacity for success. (source)

    Muhammad's failure to leave a clear line of succession resulted in perpetual internal war following his death. Those who knew him best first fought afterwards to keep remote tribes from leaving Islam and reverting to their preferred religion (the Ridda or 'Apostasy wars'). Then the violence turned within. Early Meccan converts battled later ones as hostility developed between those immigrants who had traveled with Muhammad to Mecca and the Ansar at Medina who had helped them settle in. Finally there was a violent struggle within Muhammad's own family between his favorite wife and favorite daughter - a jagged schism that has left Shias and Sunnis at each others' throats to this day.

    The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a Religion of Peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual repression, warfare...) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating. Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does it make apologies or any real effort at moral progress. It is the least open to dialogue and the most self-absorbed. It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns self-examination and represses criticism.

    This is what makes the Quran's verses of violence so dangerous. They are given the weight of divine command. While Muslim terrorists take them as literally as anything else in their holy book, and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to contradict them - outside of personal opinion. Indeed, what do they have? Speaking of peace and love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks to Allah's hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced conversion, or subjugation, it's little wonder that sympathy for terrorism runs as deeply as it does in the broader community - even if most Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.

    Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam's most respected philosophers, understood that "the holy war 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", many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully ignorant of the Quran's near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others. In the West, it is typical for believers to think that their religion must be like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and tolerance - because Muslims are taught that Islam is supposed to be superior in every way. They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to find that this is contradicted by the Quran and the bloody history of Islam's genesis.

    Others simply accept the violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death for being too Westernized. A family friend came to their defense, excoriating the jury for not understanding the "culture", claiming that the father was merely following "the religion" and saying that the couple had to "discipline their daughter or lose respect." (source). In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutal murders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca by the Saudi king - without a single Muslim voice raised in protest.

    For their part, Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous.

    There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran literally... and too many others who couldn't care less about the violence done in the name of Islam. Home Page

    © 2006-2016 All rights reserved.

    Last edited: Nov 18, 2015
  2. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member


    "There are moderate and peace-loving muslims, there is no moderate islam!"

    Last edited: Nov 19, 2015
  3. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member


    "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." - George Washington.

    Last edited: Nov 19, 2015
  4. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member


    [1:05:37 AM] ShilohaPlace: recent address


    You need to watch this seriousy. I got upset
    With young university students walking out over the truth.
    I mean Raven you will FEEL this.
    And you too perhaps rax. I mean the future of the world is at stake here right there at Brooklyn campus
    I mean in the middle of 'civilised' usa, young INTELLIGENT and educated young people, the future leaders of the world prefer lies and propaganda over facts and truth what future for the globe if USA can't handle this deceit
    [3:47:58 AM] raxnae: in a grim dark yeah their reaction just skimming through the video is absurd, I guess since they haven't experienced the horrors firsthand they still feel like its all a big game or a big joke; classic bury your head in the sand bs
    Its far more serious rax. This is a war of the mind. Unprecedented.
    But exactly as said in the codes. You must watch all of it seriously focused not scan it.
    Just to feel the mental prison those people experience; it is frightenening
    [3:52:14 AM] raxnae: alright will do
    [4:12:20 AM] raxnae: damn its worse than the helm of introspection
    [4:17:31 AM] raxnae: looks like a lot of muslims in the audience too, they are treating the speech worse than your average high schooler does
    [4:46:30 AM] raxnae: She does try to make a case for "moderate islam" but we know there is no such thing
    [4:50:08 AM] raxnae: when the caliphate rises like robert spencer says it will be just like nazi germany expanding taking territory til someone stops it
    [4:51:25 AM] raxnae: I like his video he lays it all down on the line

    [6:51:16 AM] Sirius 17: horrifically sad these students reaction to her speech
    [6:51:37 AM] Sirius 17: just goes to show how fucking imprisoned their minds are
    [6:51:51 AM] Sirius 17: imbiciles
    [7:20:08 AM] Sirius 17: and then the one woman who had actual experience gets up and tries to speak some common sense to the crowd they accuse her of threatening their exsistance. omg she has every right to be outraged at their stupidity
    [7:20:33 AM] Sirius 17: surviving a massacre of Islam herself

    [7:22:08 AM] ShilohaPlace: I actually got emotionally upset seeing this from a higher D level
    [7:22:31 AM] ShilohaPlace: It seemed like I wirnessed the utter hopelessness of the human hijacked mind
    [7:22:36 AM] ShilohaPlace: The devil memeplex
    [7:23:05 AM] ShilohaPlace: I felt the ridicule against the truth of factual disposition'

    [7:23:09 AM] Sirius 17: it is very disheartening, these are young kids, the future??? we are fucked

    [7:23:20 AM] ShilohaPlace: So you know what happened 2000 years ago
    [7:23:33 AM] ShilohaPlace: Excatly, but there was one thing
    [7:24:19 AM] ShilohaPlace: The dreams etc show you that 40 years after the Sinai wilderness, the Ark was uncovered for the first time

    [7:25:26 AM] ShilohaPlace: Now the groupconciouiness of the entire planet can be shared BY the Lion eaters see/
    [7:25:38 AM] Sirius 17: yeah
    [7:25:50 AM] ShilohaPlace: But only IF you are no longer onm the belly of the whale
    [7:25:56 AM] ShilohaPlace: You get this?
    [7:26:42 AM] ShilohaPlace: This small minute remnant on earth who CAN SEE through the devil's deception and have no earthly chance of influencing the politics of this etc
    [7:26:49 AM] ShilohaPlace: Do have a friend
    [7:26:59 AM] Sirius 17: yes the one and only friend
    [7:27:12 AM] ShilohaPlace: This smnall remnant of the 'seers' IS the missing key in a way
    [7:27:32 AM] ShilohaPlace: Yes because GOT 7 tells you that you 'rule over the all'

    [7:27:33 AM] Sirius 17: (7) Jesus said, "Blessed is the lion which becomes man when consumed by man; and cursed is the man whom the lion consumes, and the lion becomes man."

    [7:27:37 AM] Sirius 17: yes i get this
    [7:27:40 AM] ShilohaPlace: Indeed
    [7:28:05 AM] ShilohaPlace: An so whatever the Lion eaters support emoltionally from the heart etcx BECOMES LOGOS POWER
    [7:28:23 AM] ShilohaPlace: So Pam Geller, isn't she brave?
    [7:28:29 AM] Sirius 17: yes
    [7:29:12 AM] ShilohaPlace: Roger Spener and Geertt Wilders ALL have Logos with them evben if they do not invoke JC as the antidote AS LONG as the Logos witnesses support them get it?
    [7:29:33 AM] ShilohaPlace: So Thuban has a new potency
    [7:29:45 AM] Sirius 17: yes of course i can see how the Logos is using them as agents even if they are not aware
    [7:29:45 AM] ShilohaPlace: The ET dream and your sickness see?
    [7:30:10 AM] ShilohaPlace: Yes but we must make a stand too in the background matrix see?

    [7:30:28 AM] Sirius 17: i am feeling much better today, i had a bit of a rough night but the pain pill let me sleep again and the pain is starting to subside

    [7:30:39 AM] ShilohaPlace: Thuban with Logos is the antidote to islam

    [7:30:47 AM] Sirius 17: i did eat a small amount of chicken and this seemed to be ok with me

    [7:31:02 AM] ShilohaPlace: good
    [7:31:03 AM] Sirius 17: yes i feel it is empowered
    [7:31:18 AM] ShilohaPlace: I would not have gotten upset see?
    [7:31:34 AM] ShilohaPlace: It is sympathy on the higherD level now. This is new
    [7:31:44 AM] Sirius 17: yes this is it
    [7:32:04 AM] Sirius 17: the injustice cannot prevail, it just cannot continue
    [7:32:07 AM] ShilohaPlace: Logos is with this, as Logos created the antistate in a manner in this abomination
    [7:32:17 AM] ShilohaPlace: Exactly
    [7:32:30 AM] ShilohaPlace: The final war is philosophy
    [7:32:38 AM] Sirius 17: it is like the whole Earth crying out about it, this is how i felt watching her speak and their reaction
    [7:32:45 AM] Sirius 17: a pit of vipers
    [7:32:45 AM] ShilohaPlace: see how Jenetta ad hominemed us?
    [7:32:48 AM] ShilohaPlace: same thing
    [7:32:54 AM] Sirius 17: no i didn't see this
    [7:33:08 AM] Sirius 17: i just started watching the video when i saw you linked it
    [7:33:08 AM] ShilohaPlace: Give them facts and truth and they spit and ridicule you
    [7:33:12 AM] Sirius 17: then shared it on fb too
    [7:33:32 AM] ShilohaPlace: This Pam is magmificent lol a Gemini lol
    [7:33:43 AM] ShilohaPlace: I like Spencer he is marvellous
    [7:34:33 AM] ShilohaPlace: [12:36 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    <<< Yep Pris it would be nice getting back on for Tony and his crew it also would be nice "if they'd stick their hive collectivism on the back hump of their Christianity where the sun doesn't shine namely ???!!!!
    Hey, thanks, Jenetta! It's appreciated. I was beginning to wonder if I was 'all alone' here lol!
    I think the article is very well written and sums up what I mostly have already concluded myself.
    I get that not everyone is ready to hear what's 'pointed out' in the article I'm drawing attention to.
    I also get that there are those with their own agenda obviously. If there are a few things I can't stand it's fear mongering, hate mongering, and war mongering. I do not want that in this thread. Let what has already been posted be a terrific example to others what fear, hate, and war mongering actually looks like.
    It's about time we know who the real enemy is in all of this -- the enemy of the entire world.

    [7:34:44 AM] ShilohaPlace: See the same mentality?
    [7:34:55 AM] ShilohaPlace: selfrighteousness
    [7:35:18 AM] ShilohaPlace: no intelligent reply just 'know better' and changing the enemy from true to false
    [7:35:34 AM] Sirius 17: yes well same thing happens when i share these videos on fb, they get ignored
    [7:35:41 AM] ShilohaPlace: Yes same agaian
    [7:35:42 AM] Sirius 17: it is like people are afraid to address the damn truth
    [7:35:48 AM] ShilohaPlace: They are
    [7:35:49 AM] Sirius 17: seriously?
    [7:36:08 AM] ShilohaPlace: But this is global now FROM the previous rationality
    [7:36:16 AM] Sirius 17: or even talk about it in an educated way, just like Pam said, a rare thing that even anyone is allowed to speak about it
    [7:36:44 AM] Sirius 17: so disgusting and revolting this apathy and fear over offending someone
    [7:36:45 AM] ShilohaPlace: So youi can see now where the 50,000 are if this is the number
    [7:37:04 AM] ShilohaPlace: They are the mind attuned in this 'common cause' AGAINST Islam

    [7:37:05 AM] Sirius 17: while thousands die
    [7:37:09 AM] Sirius 17: fucking sick
    [7:37:22 AM] Sirius 17: but lets not talk about it
    [7:37:33 AM] Sirius 17: because we might offend someone, WTF
    [7:37:43 AM] Sirius 17: and we are the bigots

    [7:37:57 AM] ShilohaPlace: but this IS a seed on the earth mainly all the 'western countries' hijacked by their own moronic governments
    [7:37:59 AM] Sirius 17: unfuckingbelievable, just like they chanted about pam, calling her a bigot
    [7:38:04 AM] Sirius 17: the truth is the truth
    [7:38:17 AM] ShilohaPlace: As Spencer says and Wilders
    [7:38:26 AM] ShilohaPlace: Xeia had another rave against him
    [7:38:36 AM] Sirius 17: link this wilders video please
    [7:38:47 AM] Sirius 17: i missed that one, i don't even know why the hell she is upset over him
    [7:38:52 AM] Sirius 17: for what?
    [7:39:00 AM] ShilohaPlace:
    [7:39:18 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [5:10:32 AM] Kali 666: what gives you the right to call me antiLogos?
    [5:10:43 AM] Kali 666: just because i dislike your link?
    [5:11:11 AM] Kali 666: i really do not like that Wilder guy and i don't have to like him for Logos not to reject me
    [5:11:25 AM] Kali 666: the fact that i speak to Asha bothers you?
    [5:12:25 AM] Kali 666: she has been with us since day 1 and in the beginning we used to say to people thubans have all their own mind and we are not a likeminded sect...what has changed?
    [5:13:05 AM] Kali 666: i am not a follower and i do not follow Asha or anyone
    [5:13:53 AM] Kali 666: and i have the right to like and dislike things, and should have that liberty without having to worry about my so called "cosmic friends" turning their back on me and dooming me to hell
    [5:15:29 AM] Kali 666: last night it was mostly Asha and Zaina having a conversation and i only aported my 2 cents giving my view on this guy in your link and then i asked a few questions on Islamic religion to them, since they know better than me ofc
    [5:16:00 AM] Kali 666: i am still wondering what is it that i said you found so offensive exactly
    [5:16:46 AM] Kali 666: after that i make a new chat for asha and zaina and me so that asha could give us her address...i wanted to see it on google to see exactly where in Germany she was
    [5:17:41 AM] Kali 666: then i had to leave shortly because i had a night out and i had to get ready and left her and zaina talking...they talked rather at length and then it all ended well as far as i was able to read later
    [5:18:23 AM] Kali 666: this morning i come online and i see that for some mysterious reason Zaina has blocked me and left Starplanet too
    [5:18:38 AM] Kali 666: can someone please fill me in as to what is going on?

    [7:40:02 AM] ShilohaPlace: [7:39 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    <<< Kali 666: and i have the right to like and dislike things, and should have that liberty without having to worry about my so called "cosmic friends" turning their back on me and dooming me to hellSee this 'fear' pure devil mind

    [7:40:44 AM] ShilohaPlace: We are dooming anyone to hell???
    [7:41:04 AM] ShilohaPlace: This is not dragon xeia here at all
    [7:41:53 AM] Sirius 17: where is she getting this idea we are dooming her to hell?
    [7:42:08 AM] ShilohaPlace: Is what i mean. This is not Thuban Xeia
    [7:42:18 AM] ShilohaPlace: Pure construction
    [7:42:25 AM] ShilohaPlace: fantasy
    [7:42:43 AM] ShilohaPlace: asha induced or better said islam love induced
    [7:43:33 AM] ShilohaPlace: Its mindcontrol of the 'high wicked places' 1Cor. I thnk
    [7:43:39 AM] Sirius 17: how can anyone find anything to love about islam? it is revolting everything about this oppressive death cult, nothing to love at all
    [7:44:00 AM] ShilohaPlace: Did you see those yopung student girls there?
    [7:44:12 AM] ShilohaPlace: All selfobsessed but lost lost lost
    [7:44:27 AM] ShilohaPlace: Their culture CANNOT be wrong
    [7:44:28 AM] Sirius 17: yes all wearing the hijab and niqab and burka shit
    [7:44:33 AM] Sirius 17: fucking lovely
    [7:44:46 AM] ShilohaPlace: I sensed the mentality and this was rather depressing
    [7:45:04 AM] Sirius 17: all self rightiously defending their revolting belief system
    [7:45:29 AM] ShilohaPlace: Hopeless basically there is no hope from xtianity on earth etc there is NO antidote on the planet, even with this small remnant which can SEE
    [7:45:36 AM] Sirius 17: when they cheered about the islamic state taking over the world and beheading people, that right there to me was the devil mind
    [7:45:39 AM] Sirius 17: sick sick shit
    [7:45:48 AM] ShilohaPlace: But there is the Logos ET and this is or appears to be the solution
    [7:46:02 AM] ShilohaPlace: in shallah they shouted
    [7:46:12 AM] Sirius 17: yes
    [7:46:15 AM] ShilohaPlace: when Pam said Isis is expanding territorily
    [7:46:27 AM] ShilohaPlace: It sholcked even her
    [7:46:32 AM] ShilohaPlace: in the devil's den
    [7:46:35 AM] Sirius 17: yeah what the fuck is that, the cheerleading squad for ISIL
    [7:46:51 AM] ShilohaPlace: Yep
    [7:46:53 AM] Sirius 17: i wanted to bitch slap them all
    [7:46:59 AM] Sirius 17: wake them the hell up
    [7:47:02 AM] ShilohaPlace: Cheering their Allah devil
    [7:47:18 AM] ShilohaPlace: We cant
    [7:47:25 AM] Sirius 17: scream at them that they are systematically supporting genocide
    [7:47:28 AM] Sirius 17: because they are
    [7:47:46 AM] ShilohaPlace: But this situation now must evolve towards the 2018 timeline
    [7:48:07 AM] ShilohaPlace: You are talking human mind there is no hope except external shock
    [7:48:37 AM] Sirius 17: well i am ready for the logos to apply the damn electroshock paddles seriously
    [7:49:12 AM] Sirius 17: the consciousness of humanity towards this fucking Islam has flatlined
    [7:49:13 AM] ShilohaPlace: I sense if we can attune mentally, which is our task anyway it will trigger
    [7:49:36 AM] ShilohaPlace: So moabyte and chats are over for us basically a new mission
    [7:50:26 AM] ShilohaPlace: So who can do the mission or even understand i?
    [7:50:55 AM] ShilohaPlace: Your sickness see and the developments are the Lion eating
    [7:50:59 AM] Sirius 17: i am outraged over the fact my own family would have sympathy for these creeps, it seriously disgusts me
    [7:51:12 AM] ShilohaPlace: What does Jesus say?
    [7:51:28 AM] ShilohaPlace: No prophet is without honour except in his own house
    [7:51:42 AM] Sirius 17: unfortunately
    [7:52:03 AM] Sirius 17: i know you face a similar predicament
    [7:52:16 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [7:49 AM] Sirius 17:
    <<< the consciousness of humanity towards this fucking Islam has flatlinedmore than that it has been swallowed
    [7:52:32 AM] ShilohaPlace: The who can see and overcome thing
    [7:52:44 AM] ShilohaPlace: They cant see
    [7:53:14 AM] ShilohaPlace: Blinded by their own human pretentiousness that their beliefs MUST be correct and all critics wrong

    [7:59:01 AM] Sirius 17: i really don't understand what she finds so offensive about this wilder guy
    [7:59:20 AM] Sirius 17: what because he is speaking the truth?
    [7:59:30 AM] ShilohaPlace: Same thing as Carol finds in your words
    [7:59:37 AM] ShilohaPlace: yes
    [8:00:06 AM] ShilohaPlace: He is a racist see, because he calls it as it actually is the ideology NOT the muslim
    [8:00:38 AM] Sirius 17: there he again says it, he doesn't hate people but is critisizing the ideology
    [8:00:49 AM] Sirius 17: WTF
    [8:01:01 AM] Sirius 17: how does this make him racist?
    [8:01:04 AM] ShilohaPlace: Xeia finds this offensive, as he seems not to respect islam as a peacelover and culturual harmoniser
    [8:01:27 AM] ShilohaPlace: How does your explanations make you are racist
    [8:01:59 AM] Sirius 17: shakes head
    [8:02:41 AM] ShilohaPlace: You should have groked this by now
    [8:02:55 AM] ShilohaPlace: Its the end dear
    [8:03:17 AM] ShilohaPlace: This is bigger than Thuban now. It is existentialism
    [8:03:33 AM] ShilohaPlace: But Thuban has its place in it
    [8:04:17 AM] ShilohaPlace: I want you to watch Spencer on those links
    [8:04:22 AM] ShilohaPlace: He is magnificent
    [8:04:32 AM] ShilohaPlace: Banned to talk in London
    [8:05:00 AM] ShilohaPlace: catholic too so closest to the Logos of those 3
    [8:05:12 AM] Sirius 17: well let me get a feel for wilder now, since i cannot even fathom Xeia's dislike here
    [8:05:54 AM] ShilohaPlace: He talks in a second language and so is slow and calm. Perhaps she does not like this feeling it is pretentious
    [8:06:34 AM] ShilohaPlace: many clips there are excellent, even the Rushdie one
    [8:06:54 AM] ShilohaPlace: Dismantling islam using 'Satanic verses'[8:07:19 AM] Sirius 17: i own that book by the way lol
    [8:07:33 AM] Sirius 17: Solomon Rushdie's book
    [8:07:41 AM] Sirius 17: i think it is a collectors item now
    [8:07:52 AM] Sirius 17: it is the first edition
    [8:08:44 AM] ShilohaPlace: The 3rd book, explaining how Mohammed's great sin lead to the Isis atrocities as a selfforgiveness of their misdeeds or such constructions
    [8:09:12 AM] ShilohaPlace: I mean Rushdie of course knows the koran inside out as does Spencer
    [8:10:38 AM] Sirius 17: yes he was condemned to death for writing the satanic verses
    [8:11:04 AM] Sirius 17: because of course, no one is allowed to critizise Islam...EVER
    [8:11:08 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [8:11:21 AM] ShilohaPlace: Watch this first it has this in it i recall
    [8:11:47 AM] Sirius 17: k
    [8:12:11 AM] ShilohaPlace: Islam is the antichrist as a memeplex with Mohammed the antichrist or better 'man of sin' to be revealed
    [8:12:23 AM] ShilohaPlace: Only AFTER he is revealed can the great war begin
    [8:12:31 AM] ShilohaPlace: See the significance now>?
    [8:12:39 AM] ShilohaPlace: When was this revealing?
    [8:13:06 AM] ShilohaPlace: Day after Paris
    [8:13:13 AM] ShilohaPlace: 40 years
    [8:13:20 AM] Sirius 17: yes
    [8:13:37 AM] Sirius 17: some of my sickest days were then, and worst pain
    [8:13:39 AM] ShilohaPlace: This is why the timeline manifested the 'new times'
    [8:13:52 AM] Sirius 17: the Russian plane also
    [8:13:57 AM] ShilohaPlace: ending November 16th
    [8:14:05 AM] Sirius 17: it is like my body felt all these terrorist acts
    [8:14:09 AM] ShilohaPlace: Sinai archetype exactly
    [8:14:09 AM] ShilohaPlace: Sinai archetype exactly

    [9:17:08 AM] ShilohaPlace: You gave them a good totally rational video about islam lol. But I wonder if they watch it
    [10:40:13 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [10:44:27 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [10:51:20 AM] raxnae: if only the politcal ptb would listen to that guy
    [11:12:18 AM] ShilohaPlace:

    [11:11:54 AM] ShilohaPlace: checkmate well in the NW

    [11:16:37 AM] raxnae: as soon as he gets to speak the imam pulls the society multicultural assimilation card lol
    [11:18:59 AM] raxnae: lol he can't even produce a counter argument

    [11:51:29 AM] Sirius 17: this Robert Spencer has done his homework. I like how he uses exact quotes from the Koran to make his points. Factual and accurately correct.
    [11:51:47 AM] Sirius 17: no mincing words with this guy lol
    [11:54:50 AM] ShilohaPlace: Well I have not given you the real shocker yet
    [11:54:56 AM] raxnae: oh?
    [11:54:57 AM] ShilohaPlace: Hmm
    [11:55:10 AM] ShilohaPlace: Remember the furore about the Logos deniers?

    [11:55:25 AM] ShilohaPlace: Did the historical Jesus exist?

    [11:56:03 AM] ShilohaPlace: Ayasha nabs the is Osiris-Dionysus old ancient legends adaptations?
    [11:56:51 AM] ShilohaPlace: Atwill nabs?
    [11:57:00 AM] Sirius 17: yeah
    [11:57:02 AM] raxnae: I remember atwill nabs
    [11:57:22 AM] ShilohaPlace: Can you fathom the true cosmic justice now?

    [11:58:16 AM] Sirius 17: yes i am listening
    [11:58:34 AM] ShilohaPlace: Keep the dragoneroticas for later
    [11:58:48 AM] ShilohaPlace: Well then what is the cosmic justice?
    [11:59:03 AM] ShilohaPlace: Jesus reality is questioned?
    [11:59:21 AM] Sirius 17: well that the deniers would be faced with the undeniable truth, that Jesus is real, lived and exists
    [11:59:45 AM] ShilohaPlace: I mean this is the hottest potato in existence atm in regards to islam
    [11:59:56 AM] ShilohaPlace: Yes, but?

    [12:00:06 PM] ShilohaPlace: [11:57 AM] ShilohaPlace:
    <<< Can you fathom the true cosmic justice now?

    [12:00:13 PM] Sirius 17: that Jesus is no bitch to Islam for sure
    [12:00:40 PM] ShilohaPlace: Bigger than that

    [12:00:45 PM] ShilohaPlace:

    [12:00:49 PM] ShilohaPlace: Watch!
    [12:00:52 PM] Sirius 17: well that Mohammad is a big fake
    [12:01:02 PM] ShilohaPlace: True
    [12:01:29 PM] raxnae: his book did mohammad exist, did the koran exist lol
    [12:01:50 PM] Sirius 17: ohhh his book is saying Mohammad never existed lol
    [12:01:56 PM] Sirius 17: oh that is huge
    [12:02:00 PM] ShilohaPlace: yes Mohammed was invented to bring 2 conquered empires together in unification.
    [12:02:13 PM] ShilohaPlace: The Byzantine and the Persian
    [12:02:19 PM] ShilohaPlace: Huge ok
    [12:02:28 PM] raxnae: that is huge
    [12:02:44 PM] ShilohaPlace: This is why ISLAM IS POLITICAL AND A RELIGION ONLY SECONDARY
    [12:03:04 PM] Sirius 17: well of course yes
    [12:03:28 PM] ShilohaPlace: Just as Jihadists are
    [12:03:51 PM] ShilohaPlace: See the justice about the real prophet and the fake one?
    [12:03:58 PM] raxnae: I see it
    [12:04:18 PM] ShilohaPlace: Islam is the lie not xtianity

    [12:04:44 PM] ShilohaPlace: This is why the koran stole those passages from three books older sources
    [12:04:56 PM] ShilohaPlace: Zoroaster Torah and a NT
    [12:05:36 PM] raxnae: yeah because byzantine and persia had both those influences only makes sense to combine them and unify the two empires
    [12:05:54 PM] ShilohaPlace: Zoroaster because that was the Persian religion and Torah and NT because Byzantine was Christian
    [12:06:09 PM] ShilohaPlace: You got it rax
    [12:06:30 PM] ShilohaPlace: Sensation yes?
    [12:06:40 PM] ShilohaPlace: And totally suppressed by mainstream
    [12:06:57 PM] raxnae: it seems for owning one of the wealthiest cities in the world the byzantine and the ottoman empire all fell to shit lol
    [12:07:19 PM] ShilohaPlace: Constantinople took a while
    [12:08:09 PM] ShilohaPlace: Spencer talks this book at the end of this clip
    [12:18:07 PM] Sirius 17: yes take care sweety and rest well
    [12:18:27 PM] Sirius 17: god i can't believe they wanted to build this mosque on ground zero, what gall
    [12:18:44 PM] Sirius 17: how the fuck could they ever consider this
    [12:18:48 PM] ShilohaPlace: The Hillary clip is informative too
    [12:19:01 PM] ShilohaPlace: benghazi
    [12:19:15 PM] ShilohaPlace: Weird world atm
    [12:19:30 PM] ShilohaPlace: But we can see it very few can
    [12:20:13 PM] ShilohaPlace: You see the Jerusalem quote? Never mentioned in the koran?
    [12:20:33 PM] ShilohaPlace: Now what then is the big fight over the templemount then?
    [12:20:48 PM] ShilohaPlace: Its all lies
    [12:20:54 PM] Sirius 17: no not yet i am only half through this video
    [12:21:02 PM] ShilohaPlace: Islam has NO claim whatsoever over the temple there
    [12:21:33 PM] ShilohaPlace: Even secular historical speculations are upside down
    [12:21:52 PM] ShilohaPlace: the grand deception of the religious-spiritual human mind
    [12:22:02 PM] ShilohaPlace: And who has NOT fallen for it?

    [12:25:42 PM] ShilohaPlace:

    Views of Western historians

    Attempts to distinguish between the historical elements and the unhistorical elements of many of the reports of Muhammad have not been very successful.[39] A major source of difficulty in the quest for the historical Muhammad is the modern lack of knowledge about pre-Islamic Arabia.[10] According to Harald Motzki, "On the one hand, it is not possible to write a historical biography of the Prophet without being accused of using the sources uncritically, while on the other hand, when using the sources critically, it is simply not possible to write such a biography."[2]

    Historian Michael Cook takes the view that evidence independent of Islamic tradition "precludes any doubts as to whether Muhammad was a real person" and clearly shows that he became the central figure of a new religion in the decades following his death. He reports, though, that this evidence conflicts with the Islamic view in some aspects, associating Muhammad with Palestine rather than Inner Arabia, complicating the question of his sole authorship or transmission of the Qur'an, and suggesting that there were Jews as well as Arabs among his followers.[40] For Patricia Crone, a single Greek text written at around the time of Muhammad's death provides "irrefutable proof" that he was a historical figure. There is also, she says, "exceptionally good" evidence that Muhammad was an Arab political leader and prophet. She says we can be "reasonably sure" in attributing all or most of the Qur'an to him. She takes a view that Muhammad's traditional association with the Arabian Peninsula may be "doctrinally inspired", and is put in doubt by the Qur'an itself, which describes agricultural activity that could not have taken place there, as well as making a reference to the site of Sodom which appears to place Muhammad's community close to the Dead Sea.[41]
    In their 2003 book Crossroads to Islam, Yehuda D. Nevo and Judith Koren advanced a thesis, based on an extensive examination of archaeological evidence from the early Islamic period, that Muhammad may never have existed, with monotheistic Islam only coming into existence some time after he is supposed to have lived. This has been described as "plausible or at least arguable" and employing a "very rigorous historical methodology" by David Cook of Rice University, but has also been compared to Holocaust denial by historian Colin Wells, who suggests that the authors deal with some of the evidence illogically.[42][43]
    Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany's first professor of Islamic theology, has expressed the view that the Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.[44] Similar views were also held by other scholars too as Professor Muhammad Sven Kalisch quotes in his conclusions. There are many such views doubting the historicity of Muhammed. Another example is the case of Hans Jansen, a Dutch scholar, who too has the opinion that the evidences supporting the historicity of Muhammad are lacking.[45]

    [12:25:52 PM] ShilohaPlace:
    [12:28:55 PM] ShilohaPlace: Wim Raven
    [12:29:01 PM] ShilohaPlace:


    Early Muslim scholars were concerned that some hadiths (and sīra reports) may have been fabricated, and thus they developed a science of hadith criticism (see Hadith studies) to distinguish between genuine sayings and those that were forged, recorded using different words, or were wrongly ascribed to Muhammad.
    In general, the majority of western academics view the hadith collections with caution. Bernard Lewis states that "The collection and recording of Hadith did not take place until several generations after the death of the Prophet. During that period the opportunities and motives for falsification were almost unlimited."[22] However, some Western historians have defended hadith and the general authenticity of Isnad (chain of transmission).[8]

    Prophetic biography (sīra)

    Prophetic biography § Authenticity and usefulness

    According to Wim Raven, it is often noted that a coherent image of Muhammad cannot be formed from the literature of sīra, whose authenticity and factual value have been questioned on a number of different grounds.[23] He lists the following arguments against the authenticity of sīra, followed here by counter arguments:

    1.Hardly any sīra work was compiled during the first century of Islam. However, Fred Donner points out that the earliest historical writings about the origins of Islam first emerged in 60-70 AH, well within the first century of Hijra (see also List of biographies of Muhammad). Furthermore, the sources now extant, dating from the second, third, and fourth centuries AH, are mostly compilations of material derived from earlier sources.[3]
    2.The many discrepancies exhibited in different narrations found in sīra works. Yet, despite the lack of a single orthodoxy in Islam, there is still a marked agreement on the most general features of the traditional origins story.[24]
    3.Later sources claiming to know more about the time of Muhammad than earlier ones (to add embellishments and exaggeration common to an oral storytelling tradition).[25]
    4.Discrepancies compared to non-Muslim sources. But there are also similarities and agreements both in information specific to Muhammad,[26] and concerning Muslim tradition at large.[27]
    5.Some parts or genres of sīra, namely those dealing with miracles, are not fit as sources for scientific historiographical information about Muhammad, except for showing the beliefs and doctrines of his community.
    Nevertheless, other content of sīra, like the Constitution of Medina, are generally considered to be authentic by both Muslim and non-Muslim historians.[23]
    Last edited: Nov 20, 2015
  5. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    The Ontological Metaphysics behind the Physical Manifesto of Islam
    The Jihad of Islam and the Hadji of Logos

    The Resistance or Counter Movement to the Islamisation of Western Civilization by the Rationalisation of Fundamental Christianity as an Eschatological Alternative to Islam's "Islamic Nation" as a Politico-Religious Movement and Organization.

    An Open letter to all liberty centred individuals and political affiliates or friends of Roger Spencer, Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders.

    A Historical background of Islam as a Political-Religious Ideology and Organisation

    The fall of the orthodox Christian Byzantine Empire (New Eastern Rome, centred on Constantinople) in the seventh century to the Arabs in the Muslim conquests following the assassination of Maurice (reigning from 582-602) and the Byzantine-Sasanian war of 602-628 coincided with the establishment of what is called Islam in the historical records.;

    The Old Roman Empire (Old Western Rome) had deteriorated and lost its political influence by 530 and the Arab conquerers of the Byzantine Empire realized the attempt and success of its Roman predecessor to unify their jurisdictions by a religious philosophy or clerical rule for political purposes.
    So the 'times and life' of Muhammad ( 570-610- 632) can be associated with the political establishment of the Arab jurisprudence over their conquered territories, beginning in the historical records with the Rashidun Caliphs (Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali - {Sunni lineage 632-661 with Shia lineage beginning with Ali 656-661}), followed by the Umayyad dynasties as successors after the supposed death of Muhammad in 632.
    The Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan (646-685-705) is said to have collected the Qur'an under editorial access by Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, the then governor, general and administrator of Iraq.
    The actual historical manifestation of the Qur'an and the appearance of Muhammad in the records does not appear until the caliphate of Abd al-Malik and even the canonical Islamic records show no distribution of the Qur'an until the the appearance of that caliph, said to have 'collected' and edited the Qur'an during his time of Arab-Islamic rulership.
    The name Muhammad and the present unfoldment of the Islamic ideology so begins to enter recorded history in this caliphate, the label of the Qur'an then becoming more prevalent in other non-Islamic Jewish and Christian accounts and records from the eighth century onwards.
    A case so can be made, that the prophet Muhammad of the Qur'an and the construction and dissemination of the Qur'an is rather closely associated with the Umayyad caliphate of Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan.

    The prophet Muhammad could also be a label for a title or office for an exemplary personage, military leader or administrator to render the character and conduct of this model to become enshrined as 'holy law' and as infallible behavior, which should be copied and repeated as idealization. Additionally, 'Muhammad' as a title could become identified as the Muslim name for an equivalent signum such as 'Krystos' or 'Kristos' or Christ from an earlier tradition and as found within the remnants of the conquered territories, say the religion of an exiled Byzantine gnostic sect.
    The construction of 'Muhammad the servant and apostle or prophet of Allah' in the 8th Century in the Umayyad dynasty then could be an adaptation of Muhammad/Jesus, the Prophet of Allah as the Arabic translation for 'Jesus, the Prophet of Jehovah/Abba' from the earlier Christian tradition and without any then existing agenda for this conquest to become a self reenforcing validation of the political agenda as a veiled context of infallible and so coercive divinely inspired and transmitted lexicon of instructions named the 'Holy Qur'an'.
    The success of the Arab invasion in a military sense, so formed a valueable platform for the caliphates to establish political order and jurisdiction in the 'New Arabia' in the establishment of an overarching 'new religion', which could replace the older priesthoods as remnants found in the conquered lands.

    A distinction between Jehovah as the YHWH of Judaism and 'Abba the Father of Jesus in Heaven', (encoded as YHWHY and as a resymmetrisation of the Judaic Tetragrammaton into a Christian Pentagrammaton) must be made in the context of this article.
    Many of the physical atrocities committed by Islamic State and much of its global domination agenda is also found in a certain ultra orthodox interpretation of the Torah and Talmudic codices sans the New Testament.

    Robert Spencer's propositions as to the derivative of Islam as the youngest worldwide religion from older traditions based on Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Christianity so is fully supported in this essay, descriptive for the metaphysical or 'spiritual' ontology and purpose of Islam.
    Once Islam had become the official clerical administration in the Arabian kingdom, the amalgamation of those parts of the older religions considered suitable by the muslim administrators became the backbone and core for the Qur'an as the validation of Islam as being the final word of the creator.

    As 'Muhammad' could be used as a title and the claim of Christianity to the 'Krystos' was well established in Byzantine Christendom; the Islamic clerical administration decided to absorb the 'Krystos' title as the 'Prophet or servant or apostle of God' in 'Muhammad'. In this manner could the claim for Muhammad being the final and last prophet be justified, rendering Jesus Muhammad's forerunner or predecessor and who then had prepared the way for the final prophet Muhammad, apostle of Allah.
    This then became the absorption of the New Testament by Islam, centred on the title of 'Jesus the Christ' and omitting the rest of the New Testament and including the basic tenets of it, such as the death and resurrection of Jesus in the process as an irrelevant and unsuitable hindrance to the core political motivations of the by now muslim Arab nation.
    Orthodox Judaism rejected the New Testament as well and so to absorb Judaism, Islam was more sympathetic and akin to the Old Testament, the Torah and the Talmudic traditions. Islam so fully embraced the laws of Jehovah in terms of the 'conquering and administration' of the 'holy promised land' and those laws can be found in various details and derivatives in the Qur'an.
    The Torah also contains poetic treatizes of harmony and peace and love, even aligned to somewhat obscured sexual references, such as the Song of Songs of Solomon and the Psalms of David and the Proverbs and also futuristic dispensations in the Book of Isaiah, which contra more detailed actual historical accounts, such as the Books of Jeremiah and Daniel can easily be associated with any timeframe not particular to historical records in some chronological order, despite encompassing some historically verifiable references, such as to Assyria in Isaiah.37. It stands to reason then, that universal principles of poetry, art and cosmic harmony are also found in the Qur'an as adaptations from the Torah and older traditions from Zoroastrianism, if not from the New Testament and the literature of the pre- and post Christians sects such as can be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls of Qumran (essenes) in Israel or Nag Hammadi (gnostics) in Egypt.

    The western world in its blatant scientific materialism fails to understand that the motivation of Islamic State to act as it does is in no way a misrepresentation of islam as a religion of peace and love.
    Those tenets are indeed found in the Qur'an, but as a core copying effect from the Old Testament, such as its poetry and wisdom sayings found in many places.
    So the visions of the 'Greater Israel' as say portrayed in Isaiah as the Utopian New World and not placed into a particular timeframe becomes simply mirrored in the 'Great Nation Islam', the caliphate of Islamic State.
    The chronologies in the Torah, subject to historical analysis are all omitted in the Qur'an, such as Chronicles and Kings and time specific books like Jeremiah and Daniel.
    The name of the god of Judaism is well known from Exodus.3.14 as the 'I Am That I Am' and as the mystification in the kabbalistic tetragrammaton in YHWH. The 'prophet Moses' as a conquering patriarch, eliminating any resisting populations encountered in the conquered lands so fits in rather well into the Islamic agenda to conquer the world as the 'holy land' of Islam. So 'Moses' and a name which has more pharaonic linguistic derivatives, than Hebrew ones in Thutmosis and Ahmose and Rameses can also be considered a title which can be muslimized in 'Muhammad'. In this way then Islam blends the 'physically conquering 'Moses' with the 'spiritual' conquering of the 'Krystos' in the one honorific of 'Muhammad'.

    So if the god Jehovah of Judaism as found in the Torah is essentially the template god of Islam as Allah; then what is the difference?

    Jehovah has a son called Adam as his own 'perfect image' or veritas eikona. The reason of why Jehovah requires a son who then becomes a son with a daughter from the son is explored later; but Allah has no son, but both gods correlate in that both do not have a female companion to birth any sons or daughters. The reason for Eve the daughter is of course found in this physical dilemma. If Jehovah is male then where is the female? In the physical reality this becomes a paradox, but in the metaphysical ontology it becomes a cosmology preceded by a cosmogony.
    The cosmology is creation inclusive of an entire Quantum Big Bang Cosmology based on the 'Laws of Nature' and related to a 'Natural Philosophy' which unfortunately for the present invasion of the western civilization by islam has distanced itself in a blindfolded secularism from the original philosophy, which might be called a 'Perennial Philosophy' and which preceded and is the parent of the 'Scientific Philosophy'. If this cosmogony then can be modeled and constructed in a self consistent manner and (mathematical) logic; then the origins of space and time and any following cosmology such as a Quantum Big Bang creation event would be easily understood as the ontology for this cosmology.
    So then what is called the ''rationale of secular scientific-economic materialism' is like the world view or cosmology as believed in by a wayward 'prodigal son', who has forgotten or is in amnesia that he actually owes hisher existence to a mother and a father who together form his cosmogony or 'Genesis' and an origin which could be termed the 'Omni-Science of the Logos', encompassing and blending the physical realism of the cosmology with the metaphysics or spirituality of the cosmogony.

    Islamic State as the 'Eternal Nation Islam' with its value system based on a strict adherence to perceived spiritual principles became the replacement for the metaphysical omission of western civilization. Western culture in its 'political correctness' and multicultural sameness and economic priorities opened its cultural gates or Ba'bs (Arabic gate) of its own 'spiritual emptiness' or void in ignoring well understood 'dangers' to its long fought for principles of freedom of the individual and expression from other diametrically opposed principles, such as prioritizing the economic security of supplies over the danger of losing the valued and historically timeframe evolved principles of its 'free and democratic standards of society'. Appeasing the 'Nation of the Brotherhood of Islam' in the context of the United Nations and in the form of granting nationalistic group privileges becomes a treason by the political western administrators towards its own constituency in the betrayal of its stated constitutional egalitarianism for its citizenry.

    A true muslim, following his allegiance to his religion of Islam could never agree to forsake hisher spiritual fundamental position to assimilate and accept the basically anti-spiritual value system of the western civilization. So a true muslim is not a terrorist according to his metaphysical tradition, if he in any manner destroys parts or principles of any part of the 'Islamic State' not yet conquered by the 'Servants of Allah' in the model of Muhammad.
    A true muslim so cannot be assimilated into any value system which is not Islam.

    So what then is a secular muslim?
    A secular muslim is a true muslim who also fully adheres to the principles of Islam and as clearly stated in the Qur'an as the master guide book.
    A true muslim is invited to pretend not to be a true muslim, if this behavior and agenda serves Allah. In other words deception and lies (Taquia) are fully endorsed and in divine order, should such deception serve the overall islamic agenda of creating the global caliphate.

    The western assimilators and including youth workers and counsellers of 'radicalised' young muslims fail to realise that imploring the parents and the families of the 'radicalised' are not the 'unradicalised' and 'normal' and moderate muslims, who will be able to correct the aberrant behavior patterns of their misguided children of Islam.
    Would the parents and families do so, they would betray Islam and the Qur'an.
    To seek assistance from the imams and the muftis and the administrators of the islamic mosques indicates even more so, how the western assimilators have become blinded by their own sense of what a democratic civilization's citizenry should or must be.

    In terms of the metaphysics then, the great distinction between Judaism and Islam becomes the notion of a secular Jew and a secular Muslim.
    The westernization of Judaism has succeeded to a large extent in that the metaphysical core of Judaism has become the ultra orthodox faction in Israel and whilst this faction can be said to be the spiritual brother of the muslim in terms of their 'holy literature'; this spiritual brotherhood manifests iitself in a physics of total opposition as the war between the Arab and the Jew. As Pamela Geller has often said, it is not about the land it is a religious war, a war of ideas and information and there can never be a two-state solution of peaceful coexistence as is the dream of the assimilators.

    If there is a solution to the 'Middle East Crisis', then this solution must be metaphysical and not political. But the western mentality has eschewed and dismissed the metaphysical reality in its stated scientism and materialism. This 'prodigal spiritual son' is now reaping the consequences of hisher neglectfulness in the imminent loss of his own civilization. This civilization has reformed itself and has created and seeks the democratization of the world in its own image. This is precisely what Islamic State is doing and so despite the proclamations of the intelligentsia and the elitist political and economic classes in the western worlds, that this is not a clash of civilizations, it is just that.
    What the remnant of the western civilization fails to do, but Islamic State does rather well; is to present the 'Dream of Islam' as say in the 'Eternal Nation Islam'. Where is the 'Dream or Ideal Image' of the western world? Is it consumerism and advertising?
    Is it Individualisation at all costs and a separation of the group-consciousness into pockets of personal preferences, likes and dislikes?
    Is it about the relativity of truth, as the final climax of the relativism of opinion? Is it the godless world of a purposeless universe hosting purposeless individuals seeking and pursuing an ultimate meaningless existence?
    The Jihadist of Islamic State does not think so, but the elitist governors and administrators throughout western civilization do.
    Because science can explain the physical reality, in time all will be understood in a reductionistic materialistic realism?!
    Can science explain the metaphysical reality, which is rather real to Islamic State?
    It can, it has all the parts to do so. To blend the brilliant cosmology and technology and artistic culture it has developed with the ontology of this cosmology called cosmogony or the Ontology of a Science of the beginning, its own scientific genesis.
    But the elitists know almost nothing about it. So you cannot go to some library or university to find the metaphysical reality of modern science.
    Just like the Islamic State and Jihadism are dismissed as aberrations, as some punctuated equilibrium in the history and evolvement of the paradigm of science and a nexus in the timeframe of a civilization, so is the solution to the physical crisis mirrored in the world dismissed as fantasy and as valueless.
    The solution is translation of the archetypology and symbolism and language of Islam into a universal language. Doing this will harmonise and unify all religions and all the sciences in a 'New World' which then is the 'Eternal Nation Islam' and the 'New Israel Jerusalem' and a 'New Planetary Civilization' enabled to travel to the stars to explore the extraterrestrial universe.

    But here is the problem for the western civilization and which is no problem for Islamic State.
    The solution is not hidden; it is easily accessible by anyone. But it requires translation and the attempt to translate is disallowed by the western elitists and controlleurs as it is said to be divisive and private and has no place in the secularization and relativism of perception in a purposeless world of ultimate meaninglessness.
    As an example, one might present a scripture passage from the Old Testament or the New Testament or the Qur'an and state that this is more than is seen - it is a cosmic universal code as all such things are and including the suras and the hadiths of the Qur'an.

    But how does the western scientism believer react to it? Heshe dismisses it as some form historical text from the past and localized and individualized to personal preferences of both authors and readers.
    How does the jihadist react to it? He personalizes it just as the western scientist does, but the jihadist perceives immediate and present value and potency in what he processes in hisher mind contemplating the code.
    The code might be a letter or a word or a symbol or a sentence. Whatever it is; it is a means to create a mental image, a meme or a collection of memes called a memeplex.
    Memeplexes are the metaphysical reality, however dependent on some physical reality existing as a reference within say space or spacetime to create the memeplex.
    The Jihadist fully 'believes' in the reality of his own memeplex creation, whilst the western scientist dismisses it as some unreal imaginary fantasy in hisher head and brain. The belief of the scientist in the western civilization gives no credence to the memeplex of being in any way 'real' in the physical universe he explores and analyses.
    And so only the global scientist of both the figurative east and the reflective opposite west can even begin to use the western potency of analysis and criticism to find the solution to the 'wayward and radicalised' memeplexes the Jihadist eats for breakfast, lunch and tea.

    The secular Israeli fully embraces the scientism of the western civilization and many have greatly supported and added to its lexicon. Albert Einstein is a secular Jew and one of the pillars of the western scientific paradigm and he is also a pacifist and believer in the rights of the individual.
    Did Albert Einstein deny his Jewish heritage - No?! Did he in any way feel, he betrayed the ultra-orthodox interpretation of the Torah and the Talmud of his countrymen - No?!
    Did he believe in the god of Judaism at all? Did he believe in the Christian god of the New Testament, the 'Father in Heaven' called Abba by Jesus and which might not be Jehovah at all and yet being related to the god of Moses at the 'Burning Bush' via the 'unspeakable' name of the YHWH? Did he believe in some mathematical and logical order inherently discoverable in the universe and which he might have called 'The Old One'?

    Then modern Israel is just that 'modernized' and reformed in the evolvement of its political history; secular in many parts and encompassing the principles and values of western civilization into which it has integrated and assimilated easily, whenever it did not practise its particular and specific memeplexes as held divine and sacrosanct by the ultra-orthodox parts of its family. The coexistence of the ultra-orthodox Jew with the orthodox Jew with the secular Jew then is encompassed by a common bond of a shared history and past, but the general evolution of the 'Family of Israel' within a greater global context is and was fully accepted.
    But if the general Jew would consider his nation's or family's memeplex regarding their sacred scriptural legacy as serious as the muslim does, then any Jew but the ultra-orthodox Jew would become a traitor and heretic relative to the letter of the law of Jehovah and Jehovah's prophet.

    But here is the key. Where is the 'Prophet of Jehovah'? It is not Moses, because the mosaic covenant and the prophets of the Torah predict the coming of a Jewish messiah and therefore Israel is still awaiting their redeemer.
    Orthodox Jewry has rejected Jesus of Nazareth as the prophet of Jehovah and therefore Jesus became the prophet of Abba. Abba so redeemed Jehovah in the form of the metaphysical order of the cosmogenesis of the creator memeplexes at the timeframe of 2 millennia ago. Why Jehovah requires redemption relates to his and Allah's self imprisonment in the said order of the memeplexes, which ultimately relate to the existence of the codes to which all memeplexes and so all religions and philosophies and belief systems and so on owe their existence. And it is there, where the western scientific rationalism would, if it had the necessary mentality and aptitude, would find its very own raison d etre'.

    All true muslims are ultra-orthodox and cannot be assimilated into any culture except Islam, but all true Israelites are secular to various degrees and only the ultra-orthodox Jew cannot be assimilated in the individual sense, but as a group within groups heshe nevertheless integrates in the greater context of the nation Israel. This integration is also a memeplex; namely the Nation Israel is also the patriarch Jacob renamed to Israel and so the individual Jew is the Nation.
    In eschatological terms, when the 'Prophet of Jehovah' appears in the orthodox group, it will also appear in the secular group as the 'Prophet of Abba' because the god of Christianity is Abba and not Jehovah and through the New Testament and the memeplexes related to Abba and Jesus and the Apostles and Disciples there are no longer any goyim or gentiles or infidels in the 'New Jerusalem' as an 'Eternal Nation Israel' which is both the global nation of a 'New World' and the Individual belonging to it as per the New Testament memeplex as a 'universal cosmic thoughtform' energized by the 'spirit' and a 'quantum wave' which can be translated into the omni-scientific code of 'electromagnetic monopolar radiation' (EMMR) as a memeplex transformation of abstract, but mathematical archetypes and symbols.

    The history of islam and its prophet, so can be reconfigured in the light of a non Islamic account of its own data base and infused with a rationale for the secular political reason for its existence. This agenda then can be compared and contrasted with the importance and influence of the philosophies and religious administrations contemporary with the islam of the caliphates.

    • No record of Muhammad’s reported death in 632 appears until more than a century after that date.
    • A Christian account apparently dating from the mid-630s speaks of an Arab prophet “armed with a sword” who seems to be still alive.
    • The early accounts written by the people the Arabs conquered never mention Islam, Muhammad, or the Qur’an. They call the conquerors “Ishmaelites,” “Saracens,” “Muhajirun,” and “Hagarians” but never “Muslims.”
    • The Arab conquerors, in their coins and inscriptions, don’t mention Islam or the Qur’an for the first six decades of their conquests. Mentions of “Muhammad” are non-specific and on at least two occasions are accompanied by a cross. The word can be used not only as a proper name but also as an honorific.
    • The Qur’an, even by the canonical Muslim account, was not distributed in its present form until the 650’s. Contradicting that standard account is the fact that neither the Arabian nor the Christians and Jews in the region mention the Qur’an until the early eighth century.
    • During the reign of the caliph Muawiya (661-680), the Arabs constructed at least one public building whose inscription was headed by a cross.
    • We begin hearing about Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, and about Islam itself in the 690’s, during the reign of the caliph Abd al-Malik. Coins and inscriptions reflecting Islamic beliefs begin to appear at this time also.
    • Around the same time, Arabic became the predominant written language of the Arabian Empire, supplanting Syriac and Greek.
    • Abd al-Malik claimed, in a passing remark in one hadith, to have collected the Qur’an, contradicting Islamic tradition that the collection was the work of the caliph Uthman forty years earlier.
    • Multiple hadiths report that Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, governor of Iraq during the reign of Abd al-Malik, edited the Qur’an and distributed his new edition to the various Arab-controlled provinces— again, something Uthman is supposed to have done decades earlier.
    • Even some Islamic traditions maintain that certain common Islamic practices, such as the recitation of the Qur’an during mosque prayers, date from orders of Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, not to the earlier period of Islamic history.
    • In the middle of the eighth century, the Abbasid dynastic supplanted the Umayyad line of Abd al-Malik. The Abbasids charged the Umayyads with impiety on a large scale. In the Abbasid period, biographical material about Mohammed began to proliferate. The first complete biography of the prophet of Islam finally appeared during this era—at least 125 years after the traditional date of his death.
    • The biographical material that emerged situates Muhammad in an area of Arabia that never was the center for trade and pilgrimage that the canonical Islamic account of Islam’s origin depend on it to be. (pp.205-206)

    Contemporary Islam as a Political-Religious Ideology and Organisation

    Worldwide caliphate

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    A worldwide caliphate is the concept of a single theocratic one-world government as proposed by many devout Muslims, in particular Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.[1][2] In 2014, Baghdadi claimed to have succeeded in the creation of a worldwide caliphate.[3] On April 8, 2006, the Daily Times of Pakistan reported that at a rally held in Islamabad the militant organization Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan called for the formation of a Worldwide Caliphate, which was to begin in Pakistan.[4]
    Hizb ut-Tahrir, a pan-Islamic political organization, believes that all Muslims should unite in a worldwide caliphate[5][6] that will "challenge, and ultimately conquer, the West."[7] While extremists often commit acts of violence in pursuit of this goal, it is alleged to lack appeal among a wider Islamic audience.[8] Brigitte Gabriel argues that the goal of a worldwide caliphate is central to the enterprise of radical Islam.[9]


    In his 2007 book, Islamic Imperialism: A History Efraim Karsh explains the concept's origin:[10]

    As a universal religion, Islam envisages a global political order in which all humankind will live under Muslim rule as either believers or subject communities. In order to achieve this goal it is incumbent on all free, male, adult Muslims to carry out an uncompromising struggle 'in the path of Allah,' or jihad. This in turn makes those parts of the world that have not yet been conquered by the House of Islam an abode of permanent conflict (Dar al-Harb, the house of War) which will only end with Islam's eventual triumph.
    In his 2007 book, Islamic Imperialism: A History Efraim Karsh explains the concept's origin:[10] ;

    The SWORD of Allah's Jihad and the 'Islamic State Caliphate' as the WORDS of Post-Christian WORDS of the 'New Jerusalem'

    jer1. jer2. jer3.

    The recipients of this message are well informed about the status quo of the islamisation of Western Civilization and as encapsulated in the descriptors above and many more informative media presentations from Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders, David Horowitz, Brigitte Gabriel, Gregory M. Davies, Walid Shoebat, Jay Smith, Raymond Ibrahim and Pat Cornell and the political root organisations addressing this issue are available through the appropriate and associated channels of data information, public addresses, websites and conferences.

    The supporters and organisers of the resistance movement against the political islamisation of western civilization, face however a difficult task to inform the greater public about the nature of this 'coup etat' of the islamic agenda to establish a global caliphate under islamic political rule under sharia law.

    Due to the support of mainstream media and all political systems in the Western world, operating under a perceived egalitarian agenda of 'freedom of religion' and a non-discriminatory approach to minority groups, this sense of libertarianism affiliated with the executive and jurisprudential enforcement of this administration, has allowed the political intent of islamisation to become obscured by utility of its mantle or facade of being 'only' a religion and not a political movement with its own agenda.

    In other words, the political establishment of the 'social justice' and 'progressive liberalism' or the 'left wing' has become as compromised and mentally hoodwinked by its own political motivations and stated intents, as has the politics of the right wing of the 'fundamental' conservatives.
    As the mainstream media outlets for the populations in the western countries are more or less sponsored and reliant on their governmental regulations and affiliations, the prevalent 'administrative norms' regarding information dissemination to the public are dependant on the 'current mentality and mindform or memeplex of their political administrations.
    Because of the prevailing memeplex of 'political correctness' regarding the 'freedom of religious expression' and a perceived or 'wished for' multicultural integration of Islam just as a 'religion of peace' and completely separated from possible abstractions or corruptions of that religion; the path of sharing the information about the political nature of Islam with the general populations and constituency in the 'infiltrated' nations cannot take the path of the official channels of the mainstream media and public forums.


    This is the unedited version of Fitna prior to Live Leak editing it down after receiving death threats if they did not remove FITNA immediately.
    Geert Wilders brings us the truth about Islam and the Koran.​

    The rise of Islamic State as a 'fundamental' and true form of Islam and in full adherence, affiliation and obedient observance to the Qur'an has been analysed as a purely terrorist movement of 'religious madmen or crazies' of the Islamic religion and so has been dismissed by the mainstream administratons and intelligentsia as having anything to do with its political motivations and agendas.
    This course of political deception is perfectly acceptable to political Islam as clearly stated in the Qur'an as a way and method to 'please Allah' and to further the ultimate motivation of islam to establish global governance and domination in a political sense, expressed under religious sharia law.

    A new form of the Vox Populi is accessible through 'alternative and social media' however and a unifying force of the resistance to islamisation of western civilization can use this medium to enhance its seedling presence in the nations in the form of grass root political alternatives.

    The 'mad terrorists' of Islamic State and as portrayed by the mainstream media to the general citizenship of nations infected by the 'memeplex virus of Islam' are no 'crazies' at all, but fully motivated and well intentioned citizens of the new caliphate of the 'New Islamic Nation'.
    The label of the 'religion deluded fanatic terrorist' might seem appropriate to a secular and generally atheistic 'disbeliever' 'believing' instead in scientific rationalism; but becomes a 'heroic member' of the islamic community and family in the all conquering and divine islamic paradise of the 'New Nation of Islam' relative to the 'believer' in Allah, its prophet Muhammad and the Qu'ran.

    The mere idea of Islam represents a thoughtform, a meme or image created from say an universal or cosmic library of memories and like an empty canvas for a painter can become expanded and embellished by colours, hues and context to form a memeplex or collective memory bank as part of a 'cosmic story' or Logos script; so can the conceptualization, invention, system or religion of Islam become a mental belief system and realism for its creators, adherents and believers.
    Then the more this islamic memeplex is 'fed' by believers, the more energy and potency this thoughtform will carry to affect and interact with the physical and metaphysical environment in which it resides.
    The imagination defining and creating of this conceptualization can be said to become a metaphysical precursor or 'parent' for this 'image making' of this imaginary concept or 'mental energy'.

    Once the 'making of the mental images' centered on the concept of the islamic memeplex has attained certain points of saturation, say akin the boiling- or freezing point of water; it will become enabled to assume a more and more increasing concrete form and manifest itself in a shared memeplex called the religion of Islam.
    The physicalisation of the islamic memeplex will then become increasingly more potent in the creation of a physical objectification of the subject matter of the thoughtform in say literary representations like the suras and hadiths and sayings found in the Qur'an and the physical representations of islamic symbols on coins and tapestries and citadels and mosques and other artifacts.
    The manifestation of the islamic memeplex, just as any memeplex in any form of physicalisation from its metaphysical or mental definition, is however subject to reconfiguration and modification within the process of its growth and progressive expansion.

    Should now the initial creator meme, say called 'Allah' in Islam; become in some way restricted to engage in its own self evolution; then the islamic memeplex could grow in an evergrowing linear spacetimed extent; but remain dimensionally restricted in that same cosmological spacetime.
    This then constitutes the root cause for the failure of the islamic memeplex to reform or reconfigure itself in the linear unfoldment of its linear timeline of its own history.
    It is literally 'stuck in a timewarp' and unable to escape its own definition entrapment due to its original universal self definition or original originality.
    Initial conditions of the encountered physical environment and circumstance at the institutionalization of Islam, then became 'frozen in time' as a definition for the nature of Allah as unchangeable, eternal and undefinable.
    This status quo becomes Allah's restriction and inability to evolve past the environmental canvas of its own conception.
    The offspring or progeny of Allah in its 'Children of Islam' then places a time evolving restriction or imprisonment upon the mentality of the believers and adherents to the family of Allah in the evolving concept of the 'Eternal Nation of Islam'.

    It is of course possible and feasible in the metaphysics to define a creator memeplex like Allah to be unchangeable and undefinale or unimage makeable; but doing this will have consequences in the physical manifesto of Allah's family; just as is witnessed in the activity of the fundamental nature and definition of Islam.
    This realization can now be used to define a 'family' or genus of creator memes of similar disposition.
    The Allah creator meme so becomes a direct image or mirror for the Jehovah meme of fundamental Judaism, sharing the same nature of literay constancy and unchangeability.

    But in the case of the time evolvement of Judaism, the offspring of Jehovah in Adam and the continuity of Eve from Adam as the second generation from the initial creator memeplex allowed a cosmogenetic succession for Jehovah in his Son-Daughter Adam-Eve also related to a subsequent redefinition or reconfiguration of the maleness of the Son cosmogenetically inherent in Eve to become supramentalised in an evolving Jehovian memeplex and the evolution of a separate femaleness in the separation of the original Eve from the original Adam in the doubling or twinning of the maleness and the femaleness in a newly created world differing in the dimensional constitution.
    Then despite the definition of an unchanging Jehovah, the Sondaughter of a New Adam and the Daughterson of a New Eve; both and within a form of sexually differentiated archetypological twinship; could allow the Old Jehovah memeplex to eventually evolve in a new and renewed image making of the original mirror between Jehovah and Adam as a maleness and before Eve became the medium of transformation, say as the 'rib of Adam' as the original femaleness.
    Returning the 'rib of adam' as Old Eve into the original old Adam so would also mirror and redefine Old Jehovah into a New Jehovah which is called or named Abba by the 'Prophet of Abba' known as Yeshuah Jesus ben Joseph bar Thomas de Nazareth Naassenis and also as Jesus of Nazareth, the Logos of Abba redefined with the Gate or Baab of Abba also known as Barbelo Mother of the Creation Worlds of the 'Perfect Shining One' as the Father Creator.
    As Allah has no Son, Allah cannot mirror himself in a 'veritas eikona' or 'perfect image' and so Allah remains trapped in his own archetypically stipulated constancy and resides in a warpzone of universal or cosmic self imprisonment of its own orginal cosmic selfhood definition.
    Therefore Allah can be said to mirror and define a creator memeplex brotherhood in Jehovah, so uniting or contrasting this cosmic brotherhood in the religions of Islam and Judaism, in their native self similarity and definition and subject to environmemtal physical stimulus, creating the potential for war and peace and harmony and conflict.

    How then can Allah escape his selfmade imprisonment?
    Allah was defined by the creators and image makers of the Qur'an; but those creators drew on a previous creator memeplex, namely the image making of Jehovah creating a codex known as the Torah and the Old Testament of Judeo-Christianity. So the brotherhood of the creator memeplexes is mirrored and physicalized in the brotherhood of the two religion memeplexes called 'Logos or Words of Judaism' and 'Logos or Words of Islam'.

    A simple code so indicates the metaphysical dilemma for Allah archetyped and symbolized by the SWORD of ALLAH in a cosmic argument and jealousy between the two creator brothers Allah and Jehovah; Jehovah also being defined in the SWORD of JEHOVAH in the Torah and the Old Testament of Judaism.
    The two SWORDS so compete with each other in their constancy of definition and express themselves in physical image makings in environments of space and times occupied and enlivened by their respective 'Children of Jehovah' and the 'Children of Allah'.

    This conflict, physically manifested and expressed, however metaphysically defined in respective memeplexes or cultures or religions or belief systems and so on is trapped in the eternity of archetypical universal definition due to the original unchangeability of the two creator memeplexes.

    But the second generation of Jehovah has reconfigured Jehovah into Abba or more precisely AbbaBaab depending on the second generation of Jehovah becoming the first generation of Abba also twinning the original creator-creation modality into a AdamEve and a EveAdam HeShe-Shehe memeplex which can mirror Abba into Jehovah as a transformed 'New Heaven' of abstraction and a 'New Earth' of physicality, labeled as AbbaBaab.
    So Old Jehovah transfiguring into AbbaBaab will also mirror Old Jehovah in Old Allah in an extended and grafted blending of their respective families in the 'New Nation Islam' and the 'New Jerusalem'. The 'Children of Old Jehovah' so become adopted 'Children of Old Allah' and vice versa, the 'family of Allah' becomes the 'family of Jehovah' with both Jehovah and Allah renamed as AbbaBaab*, say as a Cosmic Universal Twinship of CreationCreator memeplexes, which are defined in another linguistic Logos code as 'Möbius the Klein Bottle Dragon who bites its own tail'. It is Möbius in this other nomenclature or language code, which allows the metaphysical or mathematical nature of the 'Old Heaven' as the abode of both Allah and Jehovah to encompass their eventual realization as waveformes of structural geometry in physical similarity or holographic universality. Because it is only in the Old Heaven, where the archetype of the eternity can be assigned a linguistic translation into a symbolic representation or code for a time independent evolution of the defined undefinable eternity as a definable infinity in asymptotic progression or approach. But the translation of the semiotics between corresponding memeplex definitions are not required for the purpose of this message and letter to the addressed.

    It suffices to say that the precanvas origin for all thoughtforms from the metaphysics and including all creator memeplexes like Jehovah and Allah can be said to derive from the manifestation of the metaphysics from an eternal or by definition undefined Void for the purpose to follow the path of the imagination metamorphosing into image making. Once the 'making of the images' from the imagination has sufficiently advanced a physical realization in what is called the 'Laws of Nature' and the 'Omni-Science' of the Universal Logos encompassing all Logii of the creator modalities occurs and is based on the metaphysical energy of the Void albeit defined in a created spacetime to transform in particular energy modes from the energy continuae and discretizations of defined 12-dimensional supermembranes into their lower dimensional expressions of vibration patterns of energy.
    A parent 'energy' defined in the physics of monopolar electromagnetic physics which derives from the angular radially and inertia independent acceleration of magnetopolar charges then transforms from the higher dimension into the inertia associated acceleration of Coulombic electropolar charges to create a light-matter interaction of well known and analysed electromagnetic energy patterns.
    But it is this transformation of energy patterns from the metaphysical higher dimensions into the lower dimensions of the physical adaptation and expression which defines the original memeplex potentials as the say 'collective memory vaults' or data storage banks definable as mathematical or abstract conceptualities of 'physical consciousness' and 'space awareness', (meaning the dynamics of objects occupying space relate to the consciousness and information exchange potential of that space) in the parameters of the aforementioned 'Laws of the Natural Sciences' encompassing the physicality of those expressions of existence as their seedling patterns.

    As said, the reconfiguration of Jehovah into AbbaBaab from a separated Abba Creator and a Baab Creation in the metaphysical 'Old Heaven' of the higher dimensionality also requires the transformation of the old environment as an 'Old Earth' in the lower dimensionality into a 'New Earth' and this evolvement in the physical beingness or reality requires a prior metaphysical reformation of Abba into AbbaBaab, which is the unification of the 'Perfect Shining One' as encoded 'Forethought' with 'Barbelo' as the 'Afterthought' from a particular lexicon related to the initialization of the third generation of Jehovah in the 'Logos of Abba' also known as the New Testament of Jesus the Christ.

    There exists a number alpha-omega code related from the 'Prophet of Abba', which rescues Allah from his eternal imprisonment.
    one such code is found in a particular database called the Nag Hammadi codex of Egypt (1945) and more are found in the New Testament of the third generation of Jehovah being the second generation of Abba:

    In this code, the "Old Man" is Allah and the 7-day old child defines a recreation of the 7 millennia code as a 7-day period for the Old Creation redefined in a rebirth of the Old Creation as a New Creation in the Sabbath or Mirror of the 7th day as the closure of the circle in Möbius the Klein Bottle Dragon who bites its own tail of the Omega after having chased it for a while.
    The SWORD of Allah so carries the Old Head as the S of the SWORD as alpha and becomes redefined or renamed in the WORDS of New Jehovah as Abba, the Father of Jesus with the WORDS placing the Alpha-S of the beginning of the 'Old Man Allah' as the Omega-S of Abba as his Logos. In that way is saying #4 of the Gospel of Thomas related to the alpha-omega codes found in the New Testament's 'Book of the Revelation, the apocalypse of the Christian Eschatology of John as the ARMAGEDDON or DRAGON MADE of the Old World and of Old Allah himself.
    In this way of metaphysical definition then is found the redemption of Allah's SWORD in the WORDS of ABBA through the Logos of Jesus Christ and of Christ Jesus in the eternal twinship of the second generation of AbbaBaab unified.

    The Time of the Present in Timeframes Messianic Israel-Jihadic Islam

    The potential for a physical resolution of the century old war between Israel and Islam in its physical manifestation so becomes possible, as soon as the metaphysical reconfiguration is established and made manifest in the timelessness of the higher dimensional 'heavenly abodes' of both Jehovah-Abba and Allah.
    And this is the nexus, the global populus on planet Earth finds itself from November 2015 to December 2018 as a particular form of the timeline encoding of the universal logistics.
    This timeline can be constructed in divers ways, but its historical indicator spans both the historically encoded (Jeremiah) 70-Year 'Babylonian Captivity' of Israel from the original Battle of Harmageddon-Meggido of 609-586-538BC to the Edict of Cyrus the Great of 538BC and the other historical timeline can become defined from the creation of political Israel from November 29th, 1947 in the UN partition resolution and the declaration of the Jewish Nation in the British mandate and the statehood Israel Eretz of May 14th, 1948 in a 70-year existence or timespan.
    A 40 year 'time in the wilderness' both as days and as years (Noah's flood with 430+40 years of Egypt divided into two sieges of 390 left-Israel and 40 right-Judah also apply in a 40-43 year period from 1975 to 2015 to 2018 in interwoven encoded patterns of dates and time markers found in Noah's Covenant, the dispensations of Daniel in the Old Testament synchronised and extended in the Book of Revelation in the New Testament and Ezekiel:4) also can be assigned within an encompassing 70 year timeframe for political and current historical Israel.

    The Persian revolution in 1979, displacing the Western associated and friendly, relatively secular and pragmatic Shah of Iran (Mohammad Reza Pahlavi dynasty) by the theocratic-republican Shia Cleric Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini also began the overall current memeplex of the Islamic State and resurrected its 'dream and desire' of Allah to manifest its agenda of the worldwide caliphate of the 'New Islamic Nation'. Khomeini began the resistance to the perceived westernization of Islamic culture at a timemarker mirrored in today in the resistance movement of the islamisation of western culture and civilization.
    The deterioration of the Words of Abba of the Western Judeo-Christian in Iranian culture so began the rise of the Sword of Allah in the period of time climaxing in the Iranian revolution under Grand Ayatollah Khomeini.
    The present timeframe of 2015 so indicates the mirror for the Sword of Allah to reflect in the Words of Abba renewed and beginning its ascent to mirror the Iranian revolution in a reformation of Western Civilization.
    This effect is testified by a gradual awakening of a remnant or small part of the populus within the western civilization aware about the nature and happenstance of the islamisation process made manifest in a form of apocalyptic manifesto by Jihadic Islam and triggered by the Iranian reformation in the pendulum of historical times.
    Due to a commonly shared metaphysical brotherhood between Jehovah-Abba and Allah and in effect since Islam's creation in the Qur'an and the muslimisation of the previous Arabian identification however; the pendulum of history will not swing into more continuing and repeating reflective modes.
    Both Islam and Judeo-Christianity share a similar eschatology in a perceived and archetypological 'time of the end' and universal judgement.
    This eschatology is defined in the metaphysics of both physicalizations of the creator memeplexes and so must in some manner be 'fulfilled'.
    Islamic State so represents a well planned and archetypically energized medium for the islamic eschatology as its apocalypse of the Old World and climaxing in the creation and universal domination or supremacy of a New World called 'Eternal Islamic Nation'.
    The Judeo-Christian eschatology carries the same parameters in a different naming of the messianic and antimessianic symbols and labels; but it is defined not in the 40 Year timeframe of Islam with a naturally defined nexus point of the Iranian revolution.
    The 70- Year timeframe of political Israel then becomes the applicable chronos for the Judeo-Christian religion, but is skewed by the difference between the Jewish and the Christian memeplexes for their respective eschatologies and as defined in the Torah for the Jews and in the New Testament by the Christians.

    by Lance S. Owens

    These are the secret sayings which the living Jesus spoke and which Didymos Judas Thomas wrote down. And he said, "Whoever finds the interpretation of these sayings will not experience death."
    In its opening words the Gospel of Thomas offers a stunning hermeneutic challenge: "whoever finds the interpretation of these sayings will not experience death." Unfortunately, modern reader comes to this incipit devoid of a technique of interpretive reading -- an hermeneutics -- that grants entry into the mysterious meaning vouchsafed by such words.

    Current academic studies respond to the challenge of the text with modest modern techniques of historical and sociological analysis, conceptual dissections of parallelisms, and suppositions about obscuring temporal stratifications within the compilation of the sayings. Unable to find any hermeneutic method for unlocking a coherent meaning in the Gospel of Thomas, some critics simply deny the organic function of this incipit relative to the remaining logion. In sum, they conclude the sayings of the living Jesus collected in the Thomas gospel are a hodgepodge with no integral, coherent intention.

    The question I pose is this: Was there an original tradition of interpretation – a hermeneutic technique – implicit in early transmissions of the Thomas tradition that gave an organic coherence to readings of the text, and if so, is that hermeneutic method still accessible? Can modern readers meet the challenge of the Thomas incipit?

    In attempt to answer this question, I start with a consideration of saying 12 of the Gospel of Thomas and its reference to "James the Just", then extend discussion to an overview of Jewish apocalyptic traditions in the intertestamental period, moving forward to the Sophianic tradition, and the tradition of vision in early Christianity. From there I finally circle back, by way of the twelfth logion, to elucidate an original interpretive technique -- an anagogical, visionary hermeneutics -- implicit in the Gospel of Thomas.

    I. The Mysterious James

    Saying 12 – The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."

    Reference to James as an authoritative figure in saying 12 of the Gospel of Thomas has caused difficulty for scholars attempting to date the Gospel’s composition to a period after the first century. The community of James, historical associated with Jerusalem, ceased to exist after the Roman destruction of Palestine around 70 CE. If the text of the Gospel of Thomas was produced subsequent to that date, or if the version we now possess underwent later redactions with intent of conforming the text to theological and sociological views of a period foreign to the earliest formative years of Christianity, then why was this authoritative reference to James retained in the twelfth logion? And if the saying indeed dates to the earliest decades of Christian tradition, what significance does reference to James hold for interpretive readings of the Gospel?
    As Robert Eisenman details in his controversial book, James: The Brother of Jesus, several persons named James appear in accounts of the early Christian community. Exactly which James was "James the Just" remains historically ambiguous, though the ecclesiastical importance of the James identified as "the Lord’s brother" is clearly evidenced in the earliest documents of Christianity, the Pauline letters. Eisenman argues James the Just is this same "brother of the Lord", and his compilation of source materials on the James tradition merits close reading. Central to his discussion is the twelfth logion of Thomas:
    "This statement [logion 12] is pregnant with implications where the pre-existent ‘Just One’ or Zaddik’, so important in Jewish mystical tradition or Kabbalah, is concerned. It is also at odds with the orthodox tradition of the succession of Peter. It represents nothing less than the lost tradition of the direct appointment of James as successor to his brother. It is upheld by everything we know about groups that were expelled from orthodox Christianity…." (p53)
    While the thesis Eisenman develops from his sources, and the conclusions he forms about the James tradition are at best highly tentative, the question from which his discussion takes flight deserves consideration: Was James associated with a "lost tradition" in early Christianity? And if so, how was this tradition related to the tradition of the Gospel of Thomas? To answer those questions, we must consider the environment from which early Palestinian Christianity arose.

    II. Jewish Apocalyptics

    The first century was a "super-saturated" cauldron of spiritual aspirations awaiting the nidus of new formation. Jesus appeared at a kairos – an auspicious moment – a moment ripe for renewal, and he was anointed by that age as a messiah. Regardless of how one understands the historical personage named Jesus of Nazareth, a new religious tradition crystallized around his life, words, and name. The tradition he catalyzed cannot, however, be entirely dissociated from preexistent aspirations of the epoch transformed by his appearance.

    Central to the foundation of Christian tradition was the formation of a new story, or myth, about the relationship of God and humankind. Preexistent "apocalyptic" aspirations of the age clearly helped nurture development of this new myth. (The Greek word apocalypse, meaning a "revelation" or an "uncovering" of something hidden, refers in biblical scholarship to a genera of visionary writings common in the intertestamental period. I will use the term here in its broader connotation of "revelation", and without implying a cataclysmic context.) Mythopoetic (or, "myth creating") apocalyptic vision was not the idiosyncratic provenance solely of second-century Gnosticism, a fact often overlooked by students of early Christianity. This mythopoetic tendency associated with second-century Gnosticism stands in context of a preexistent and perpetuating tradition. As early as the second century BCE, the Enoch literature documents a strongly visionary mythopoetic inclination in intertestamental Judaism. Texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran further detail the burgeoning apocalyptic creativity of the century preceding Christianity’s birth. Indeed, the formation of Christianity itself reflects a vast mythopoetic creativity – though, of course, by creedal affirmation this story is uniquely sanctified by divine authorship. (Within the visionary tradition, of course, each story mediated by the creative force of a prophetic voice is understood to be of divine authorship; faiths divide in selecting their prophets, but unite in affirming the validity of a prophetic voice and story.)
    In first-century Palestinian, the cultural forces of unrest were not solely fomenting political renovation of the Jewish state, a theme often emphasized in sociologically biased considerations of the period. It was an age of equally intense spiritual unrest, expectantly awaiting manifestation of a divine touch and of a human ascendance. The transformative event would be mediated through a Teacher of Righteousness, a Zaddik, a messiah. Through him, living waters would come to those in thirst.

    The Thanksgiving Hymn (found among the Dead Sea Scrolls) reads, "But Thou, O my God, hast put into my mouth as showers of early rain for all who thirst and a spring of living waters…. Suddenly they shall gush forth from the secret hiding places…" (Logion 108 in GTh vaguely echoes this same image, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me; I myself shall become that person, and the hidden things will be revealed to him.") In this broad cultural setting there was a spiritual longing that sought after the living water of a human-divine communication. It sought after and claimed reception of revelation, vision, and prophecy. From experience of the visions vouchsafed these seekers there crystallized a new canon of salvific stories (or "myths") about the relation of humankind and God.

    Christianity in earliest form should be understood within this associated matrix of traditions. Jesus’ proclaimed initiator, John the Baptist, and several of his first disciples, had links to a broad milieu of Jewish apocalyptic traditions represented by the Enoch literature and Essene communities. Eisenman even suggests in a tenuous argument that the early Jesus movement was essentially contiguous with the Essene tradition.
    To better understand this history, one must place apocalyptic ("revelatory") experience in its human context. Western humanity has repeatedly told a story of an experienced intimate relationship that constitutes supreme communion with Divinity. Whatever it "be", it is a reality deeply entwined in the history of religions. The words religion and experience have, of course, been disconnected by the thrust of rational theology endured by our age. But in primordial origin and in ongoing life, religion is intrinsically experiential. And visionary experience was alive in the matrix of Jewish apocalyptics that gave rise to early Christianity.

    In the scientific bias of our age, such "revelatory experience", or "experience of God", has become the dream of diseased minds, or the aura produced by a brain in the midst of the aberrant neurochemical events we call a seizure ( I speak as a doctor well versed in this cognitive-neurophysiological model of understanding the events of human consciousness). Such linguistic amulets of reason cannot, however, ward off the fact that human history flows and eddies and takes course around the contours of this experience’s reality: evidence Jesus, Paul, Mani, Mohammed, all men anointed by the charisma of experience, all transformers of history. In the experience which we call sometimes vision, sometimes prophecy, there abides an intimate relationship between the experienced transcendent, named with the name of God, and the imminent Man. The conduit of that relationship is a living being, the human who touches and is touched by an experience of "Other". From his mouth their flows the living water that gives to religion new life.

    The above statement is not intended as a metaphysical declaration. Nor am I speaking here of religious concepts. It is simply an empirical fact. Humans have given repeated testimony of experiences which they interpret as "transcendent", whatever the experiences' "psychological" or "spiritual" or "neurophysiological" source. History evidences well that there is an experience of transcendent vision which leaves upon heart and tongue the savor of Divine communication. This experience was most certainly alive among first century men and women stirred by the words of the living Jesus.

    III. The Sophianic Tradition

    The writings of Philo of Alexandria and the Alexandrian Jewish author of Wisdom of Solomon evidence another crucial motif of the visionary tendencies within intertestamental Judaism. Bringing the Sophianic (or "Wisdom") tradition represent by these works into context, however, requires, a consideration of the mythic domain of Sophia as she was developing in the age of Jesus: during the first century She was emphatically not just a philosophical concept, but a divine hypostasis of implied feminine gender with whom the seeker sought union.

    David Winston, in his introduction to the Anchor Bible edition of the Wisdom of Solomon (WS), refers to Her as "Dame Wisdom". By the time Philo and the author of WS put pen to parchment in the Middle Platonic atmosphere of early first century Alexandria, her story had been developing for over two hundred years as an expression of a renewed Jewish mythopoetic vision. We find her in Proverbs and Job, and later in Ecclesiasticus (also known as in the Wisdom of ben Sirach). She was a "charming female figure playing always before Yahweh, after having been created by Him at the beginning of his work." (p 34) To know her – so the story tells – was a rapture, an experience. The author of WS describes the event with frank sexual imagery: she is the Bride with whom one entered the bridal chamber. Union with her is a union with God, a conjunction of immanent and transcendent. As Winston states in his introduction,
    "There appears to be good reason, then, to conclude that the author’s highly charged language concerning the pursuit of Wisdom and her promised gifts, may allude to a mystical experience through which, he believes, man is capable of some measure of union with Deity, at least under the aspect of Sophia." (p 42)
    Who Sophia was she alone could reveal, and so She did: "Generation by generation she enters into the holy souls and renders them friends of God and prophets" (WS 7:27). But it must be understood that Sophia’s story was still very much in a process of "becoming" during the first century. While Philo and WS offer literary evidence of her myth at a critical stage of formation, its development was certainly not confined to the philosophical discourse of Alexandria, nor was it restricted to the philosophical forms in which these writers appear to cast it – even if we understand the word "philosopher" within its full sense as a "lover of Sophia". Their writings are only two temporal "snapshots" of Sophia’s myth within a broader cultural context and an extended organic process of formation. At the time of Philo (c. 30 CE) the Sophianic myth had been in development for at least two hundred years. It yet would see further metamorphosis within the visionary context of the next century’s Gnostic exegesis.

    This approach to Wisdom/Sophia as a myth in formation, and the assertion that at center the myth spoke of an experience of Divine-human intercourse, will be foreign to some readers. Nonetheless, there is ample evidence that the Sophianic tradition was rooted in – or at very least nurtured by – an experiential, visionary (and, thus, "myth making") tradition that sought after something quite beyond the joys of "wise thought." It was not solely a "literary" tradition, even if literary manifestations are signal evidences of its existence. In the Palestine of Jesus, the myth of Sophia very probably found forming and sustaining voices within communities of individuals seeking direct, experiential, visionary contact with Divinity – the "holy souls and friends of God". In several of the Qumran documents we find Her spirit present. (Winston, p 31) She appears in subtle form as the Logos-Sophia of the Gospel of John. And Her gift reflects from within the Logion of Thomas.

    The assumption that it is entirely a "philosophical" Middle Platonic concept that forms the Wisdom tradition in its intersection with the early Christianity discounts a fundamental fact of the Sophianic quest. The seeker of Sophia sought union with a Bride: he wished to experience Her, to be made a prophet by Her, to love Her, to enter the ecstasy of Her embrace. Note that throughout the Sophianic literature, it is never stated what Sophia teaches. We are only told that Her gift is a wonder and the most worthy quest of humankind. One might suggest this reticence is based in the fact that the experience of Sophia’s embrace is completely beyond the bounds of exegetic expression.

    IV. Formation of the Jesus Tradition in Palestine

    Though every religion develops with sociological underpinnings, historical antecedents and political consequences, the formation of a "new" religion invariable is firmly rooted in charismatic mystery – the mystery of "spiritual gifts" and events. Again, let me make clear that this statement is not a metaphysical declaration, but a reflection of the long human record of empirical facts: humans experience relationship with "something" transcendent which – using a word born in time immemorial – they call God. By nature, religion links transcendent and immanent realities, it gives expression to the relationship of humanity and divinity. In the Western world, particularly amongst the children of Abraham, religious metamorphosis takes form in a human experience of divine revelation – an experience which makes of men prophets and visionaries in the mold of the prototypical prophet of the West. Whatever its "true source", there is an "event", a moment of epiphany, an intimate experience of intercourse between man and God: a prophet, or apostle, or visionary, or Zaddik is called by the divine voice. He subsequently speaks with the power of that charismatic anointing.

    Regardless of how radically "new" a great religion-forming vision may seem in the perspective of Western history, its first formative voice – be it Jesus or Mani or Mohammed – invariably stands itself within the context of prophetic tradition. Vision itself is, after all, a tradition amongst the children of Abraham. The reality of a new prophet’s vision places him "at one" with all true revelation. His revelation – so it will be claimed – is the vision anticipated by every true revelation.

    Of course the socially appointed guardians of "tradition" perpetually judge such deconstructive prophetic readings of "conveyed tradition" as misreadings – as heresies, as deviant aberrations of the received truth. And indeed they are. But the strongest of these strong misreadings (to use a term coined by Harold Bloom) make new religions. The prophetic voice speaks religious metamorphosis; it is the living reality of prophetic tradition. Henceforth all conveyed tradition – the cultural legacies of myth, text and memory – are reformed within the creative fire of reborn prophetic vision. Vision becomes the hermeneutics by which tradition is read and defined. However seemingly new, the inspired misreading of vision claims its primacy in a source older than time. It is the original, true and everlasting tradition.

    The tradition which coalesced around Jesus in Palestine was built upon a foundation of apocalyptic and Sophianic aspirations that characterized the visionary zeitgeist of the age. In the Jesus tradition, the epoch’s creative spirit found both perpetuation and new avenues of maturation. It can be argued that the story or "myth" which developed around Jesus had been seeking various forms for two hundred years: it was presaged by the Teacher of Righteousness in Essene tradition; in Hellenistic culture Osiris, Hermes, Sarapis and Dionysus had all played roles that took new cast in the emergent story of Jesus. But the story of Jesus was clearly not just a "rehashing" of old motifs. In final development, it was a bold new creation of vision: a prophetic vision come to form in an age alive with visionary creativity.

    Whatever the mythic underpinnings or visionary embellishments to his story, Jesus of Nazareth did apparently exist. His life was the nidus that initiated formation of a tradition. He walked and taught in Judea and Galilee. Disciples came to him and saw in him something extraordinary. Through him – through the story they found in him – they experienced a new vision of God and man. As indicated by the reported events on the Mount of Transfiguration, his disciples apparently shared visions with him. And after his death, they had visions of him. Though dead, he lived with them and in them. He spoke to them. Through them, his words reached out across the world.

    In searching source for the "words of the Living Jesus", it is essential that we keep in mind the visionary proclivity of the age. Whatever Jesus said in life, those sayings were given significant new depths of meaning by events perceived to have followed upon his death. After his death the "living" (redivivus) Jesus was claimed by his disciples to have appeared to them and to have given them further teachings. Metaphysical or "faith-based" affirmations aside, this was the certain perception of those apostles who perpetuated his teachings and memory.
    The four canonical gospels all end with assertion of this appearance (though textual evidence suggests the final verses of Mark dealing with the post-resurrection appearance, from 16:8 forward, are a later emendation). Continuing the story of the post-mortal ministry found in the Gospel of Luke, Acts begins:
    "He showed himself to these men after his death, and gave ample proof that he was alive: over a period of forty days he appeared to them and taught them about the kingdom of God." (Acts 1:3-4)
    While the four canonical Gospels and Acts are all late first century accounts, Paul gives very early evidence of a widespread witness to the perceived post-mortal ministry of Jesus in I Cor. 15:5-8 (dating to around 48-52 CE):
    "…he appeared to Cephas and afterwards to the Twelve then he appeared to over five hundred of our brothers at once, most of who are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James and afterwards to all the apostles. In the end he appeared even to me."
    The Gospel of John, textually the latest and the most unique in heritage of the Gospels, gives the longest account of this ministry of the resurrected Jesus (making frequent mention of Thomas "the twin" in the account). The rendition ends with these words: "There is much else that Jesus did. If it were all to be recorded in detail, I suppose the whole world could not hold the books that would be written." (John 21:25)

    Accounts from the first century seem in accord that there were transformations in the disciples’ understanding of Jesus and his words during the period immediately following his death. The John gospel gives insight into the transformative spiritual force that was perceived to awaken this new perspective: "I have told you all this while I am still here with you; but your Advocate, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and will call to mind all that I have told you." (John 14:25-26) Assuming the Gospel of John took final form at least fifty years after the events it discusses, one might read this verse as reflecting ongoing perceptions within the Johannine community not about how the words and teachings of Jesus would be recollected, but about how they had been recollected by his disciples: and that recollection involved a spiritual anamnesis. Of course the reputed ministry of Jesus redivivus and the subsequent anamnesis (or "remembering") of his words mediated by the Holy Spirit played a continued role for segments of the second century Christian community eventually characterized as "Gnostic". One might suggest this Gnostic penchant for spiritual anamnesis was a process organically rooted in first-century traditions dating to the post-resurrection teachings received by the disciples.

    Undoubtedly the mortal Jesus deeply influenced his disciples. But the words he spoke to them took multiple levels of new meaning in spiritual manifestations perceived to follow his death. These manifestations emphatically confirmed to the disciples the meaning of his life and ministry. Any orally or textually transmitted record of the "sayings of the Living Jesus" originating among the original disciples of Jesus in Palestine would certainly have been formed and influenced by "apocalyptic" manifestations of meaning developed in the period following his death. The original disciples knew him in life and they experienced him again as living after his death. They gave apostolic testimony to their knowledge of this still-living Jesus.
    It seems likely that there were words of Jesus redivivus recollected by some early disciples which would have been guarded and conveyed only within chosen communities. Teachings endowed with deeper levels of meaning – meanings "called to memory" by spiritual agencies – are the types of sayings most likely to have been held in limited circulation. The sayings recorded in Thomas are in large measure the very type of verbal recollections that might exemplify a collection of "hidden sayings", words endowed with profound implications "to be understood only through the spirit of revelation" (perhaps an implication of the common refrain in Thomas, "he who has ears, let him hear"). In making this assertion, I emphasize again the apocalyptic tenor of the time. Revelations and spiritual manifestations were formative forces in the early Christian community, and they undoubtedly influenced every recollection about Jesus shared by the first disciples.

    V. Paul, Jerusalem and James

    The Pauline letters – our earliest primary record of the new Jesus tradition – evidence the crucial role played by "revelation" and "spiritual manifestations" during the tradition’s formation. Paul claimed knowledge of Jesus granted to him in its entirety through revelation. The story of Paul’s vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus is well known. In his letter to the Galician’s, dated between 48 and 58 CE, Paul boldly declares the exclusive revelatory source of his knowledge:
    "I must make it clear to you, my friends, that the gospel you heard me preach is no human invention. I did not take it over from any man; no man taught it me; I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. ...When that happened, without consulting any human being, without going up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before me, I went off at once to Arabia, and afterwards returned to Damascus. Three years later I did go up to Jerusalem to get to know Cephas. I stayed with him a fortnight, without seeing any other of the apostles, except James the Lord’s brother." (Gal 1:11-12, 16-19. The point is restated in the pseudepigraphic Pauline letter to the Ephesians, 3:3-5.)
    Whatever the disagreements between Paul and the disciples residing around Jerusalem, those earliest disciples did apparently accept Paul as an apostle of Jesus. Paul’s visionary encounter with Jesus and his claims of knowledge gained through revelation were acknowledged as valid by disciples who had known Jesus in his mortality. It is difficult to imagine why this select group would have granted the Pauline revelation validity if it were not that they themselves had shared similar experiences. Gospel accounts document that they did have such analogous visionary experiences. Paul authenticates this fact in his letter to the Corinthians (quoted above), wherein he gives context to his own revelation through an affirmation of the original disciples’ visions of Jesus.

    But there was a crucial (and perhaps insurmountable) difference between Paul and the disciples in Jerusalem: They had walked with Jesus for several years and heard him teach. Paul had not. Some of them had been influenced by preexisting apocalyptic spiritual aspirations (broadly characterized as "Essene influences"), some may have been earlier followers of John the Baptist. Paul most certainly had not. While the original disciples developed a deepened understanding of Jesus after his death – through the mediation of an experience called "revelation" – for many of them this revelatory experience would have been an amplification of teachings they had heard Jesus offer during his mortality. Paul had not shared in that experience.

    The Pauline revelation thus stands in ambivalent relationship to the "words of Jesus" which would have been recollected by early disciples. Jesus did speak. His words and their meanings were recalled after his death within an ambience claimed to have been enlightened by "spiritual" agencies bestowing revelatory anamnesis. While Paul professed access to the same "gifts of the spirit", he had limited access to the spoken heritage of Jesus’ words. In his many epistles he seldom referred to or reflected specific knowledge of Jesus’ words. History of course witnesses the profound charismatic power granted Paul by the spirit of revelation alone: he is the first chosen voice of Christianity. Nonetheless, it remains quite likely that there was another understanding of Jesus – a tradition rooted in words verbalized by Jesus to a select group of mortal men and women, a tradition subsequently nurtured by those same individuals’ vision of their risen Lord – to which Paul had little access. The Gospel of Thomas may contain a remnant of that tradition.

    And so we finally come back to Logion 12 and the mystery of James the Just:
    The disciples said to Jesus, "We know that you are going to leave us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to them, "No matter where you are you are to go to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."
    In Paul’s polemic, the name of James was associated with a Jesus tradition mired in Jewish cultural precedents and unwilling to break free of the "the Law". But in light of the above comments, it might also be suggested that within this Jerusalem community there existed a memory of Jesus’ teachings – a memory importantly augmented by revelatory events – to which Paul did not have ready access. Knowledge of sacred words was sacred. Its transmission was probably guarded. What we know of Paul’s visits to Jerusalem does not suggest he gained intimacy with the inner community of original disciples. At various places in his letters Paul makes clear his competition with, and even antagonism toward, the church at Jerusalem, as well as toward others he refers to as "superlative apostles" – teachers apparently associated with a Jesus tradition not embraced by Paul.

    In this context Logion 12 is quite understandable -- if it is dated to a period within the first decades after the death of Jesus, the period in which the original disciples were "recollecting" the words of Jesus. James the Just, "the brother of Jesus", would quite naturally have been accorded a role of leadership and honor by the community of disciples gathered in Palestine after the ascension of their Lord. James had evidently walked beside Jesus, he may have experienced visions with Jesus during his life, and he had seen the risen Jesus in vision after his death – the last a fact affirmed by Paul. He may even have verbally received from Jesus the commission memorialized in Logion 12. Though conjectural, one might further suggest James the Just had links to influences infusing the Jesus movement from preexistent apocalyptic strains of Judaism (Eisenman attempts this argument), including (I suggest) the epoch’s Sophianic aspirations.

    If one wishes to go even further and intuitively impute an esoteric tenor to logion 12, this saying may have been read within an early community of understanding as affirming the priority of a "non-Pauline, non-Petrine" lineage of knowledge linked in memory to apocalyptic aspirations extant in non-normative Jewish traditions – a heritage understood by early disciples as having been consummated and vitally transformed by the Living Jesus. Such an argument accords well with what we know about early origins of the Jesus tradition. It is certainly not counter-intuitive to suppose some members of his incipient movement remembered and considered important what we have also finally come to understand, even at great temporal distance from the fact: the Jesus tradition had roots in, and was influenced by, Jewish apocalyptic culture of the first century.

    VI. Thomas and the Hermeneutics of Vision

    Among the first disciples of Jesus in Palestine there were at least some who did not see their movement as a "new religion". Instead, I suggest they understood it within the context of their time as the manifestation of a perpetual stream of living water flowing from the most ancient source of tradition: the vital, renewing intercourse between God and man. By nature, the "vision tradition" radically deconstructs a received tradition in the name of "true tradition". Apocalyptic tradition – the tradition of vision – is mediated neither by ritual nor text nor dogma, but by the immediacy and verity of a unique human experience. This experience reads the prophetic past through the medium of its asserted origin: primary revelation, the experiential event of vision. At the beginning of the deconstruction mediated by new vision, exoteric vessels of tradition may persist even as they are being emptied, recast and refilled. Ritual behaviors – the outward inherited forms of tradition – take new meanings. Traditional texts are not rewritten but selected and reread (or mis-read) to reveal previously unanticipated implications.
    One need only examine the later history of Kabbalah – "the tradition" of Jewish mysticism – for repeated evidence of this deconstructive process. Moses de Leon’s masterful compilation of the Zohar in the thirteenth century and Isaac Luria’s bold restatement of the Kabbalistic mythos in the sixteenth century were both unprecedented, and yet each was embraced in its time as a verity of immemorial tradition – a prophetic tradition reaching back to the first Adam, a tradition which allowed (or even demanded) its own restatement by primary, mythopoetic vision. The thirteenth century Islamic mystic Ibn Arabi stands as another example of a visionary "revisioning" redefining tradition within the prophetic legacy of Abraham. In each of these instances the exoteric forms of tradition were maintained while being reformed from within by a new mythos replete with new perceptions of symbolic meaning.

    The hermeneutics embraced by the vision tradition is seldom properly understood. Following a schema proposed by Dante at the beginnings of fourteenth century, theories of hermeneutics continue to delineate four interpretive techniques that are typified in readings of sacred text: literal, moral, allegorical and anagogical. The last and most nebulous category, "anagogical interpretation", offers best entry point for understanding the radical hermeneutics of the vision tradition. Taken from Late Greek, the word anagoge roughly means "spiritually uplifted". An anagogical interpretation – as usually defined – "lifts" the text from its concrete form into a spiritual dimension of outwardly hidden meaning. In the vision tradition, the "lifting up" occurred specifically through the imaginative power of vision. It was not a rational, intellectual or discursive process, but an experiential, apocalyptic revelation that drove this hermeneutics.
    Historically, Kabbalah is perhaps the most obvious and approachable tradition to embrace anagogical hermeneutics. Prophetic Kabbalah asserted that one could only understand the meaning of prophetic writings by personally entering into the primary experience of prophetic vision. Only an experience of primary vision granted understand of the meanings hidden within the prophetic and sacred texts of the Torah. Of course it was understood in Kabbalistic tradition that few men were blessed to reach such an exalted threshold of vision. But in every age some did. (This is a complex line of discussion. In addition to the prophetic aspect of Kabbalah, their developed philosophical and theosophical manifestations of Kabbalah in the fourteenth through seventeenth centuries that were more intellectually speculative and less primarily centered on pursuit of prophetic vision. I direct those interested to the extensive writings of Gershom Scholem and Moshe Idel.)

    The Gnostic hermeneutics of the second century was anagogical in the same sense: through imaginative vision pseudepigraphical accounts were authored and myths were "remembered". Apocalyptic Gnostic writings were granted authority within their own community not by virtue of their historical provenance, but by the perceived primacy of their source, the prophetic imagination. This is the conundrum presented by the vision tradition that so infuriated more rational and prosaic minds in the second century: when does vision transform into immutable text, where does revelation stop and dogma begin? Or to use the terms of the sociologist Max Weber, how and when is charisma institutionalized?

    I suggest that at a very early stage in the development of the Christian tradition there were disciples who gave primacy to an anagogical hermeneutics – a hermeneutics I choose to call "the hermeneutics of vision". In my comments above I have briefly indicated evidences that might suggest existence of a visionary hermeneutics within the early Jesus movement. I further suggest this hermeneutics of vision persisted as an accepted form of tradition into the second century and was organically linked to development of what later was termed Gnosticism. Within Jewish culture, it found independent early expression in Merkabah mysticism and then a later and more general acknowledgment in Kabbalah.

    It is my opinion that the Gospel of Thomas represents an early ramus of this tradition – a tradition which predated Jesus and flourished under his influence. This tradition is defined by its hermeneutics: Only one who understands the method of interpretation will understand the message. It is a psychological paradox: the message is the method; the method is vision – a perceptive, spiritually uplifted, visionary encounter with the message. The Words of the Living Jesus presented in Thomas became doorways to an experience of knowing. Implicitly and explicitly, they demand from their interpreter an anagogical hermeneutics – a technique of interpretation vouchsafed by vision. This argument does not date the origins of Thomas into a second century "Gnostic milieu" but rather asserts the hermeneutics of vision that engendered Gnostic Christianity was taking form around Jesus at a very early date.

    The vitality inherent in this imputed visionary hermeneutics might suggest inevitable instability in the textual forms of the logion of Thomas. But here an important distinction must be made: visionary mutability of a text’s meaning does not necessarily demand redaction of the conveyed verbal forms of the text – indeed, quite the contrary. Its was the interpreter who was to be changed by the text, and not the text that needed to be change by the interpreter! The words of the logion are a doorway to visions of meaning. By passage through that door the interpreter met radical transformation: "he will not taste death". A tradition of visionary hermeneutics might actually tend to preserve the integrity of a text more faithfully than did traditions of textual transmission focused on literal, moral or allegorical interpretation. By anagogically placing meaning above the concreteness of words, there was arguably less motive for a redactor familiar with anagogical tradition to reform the text in order to achieve conformity with literal (and temporally mutable) dogmatic demands. I suggest for this reason that the synoptic tradition was probably less stable within its provenances than were the logion of Thomas within their lineage of transmission. Within the vision tradition, the words of the Living Jesus were endowed with a spiritual or magical potential – they had intrinsic transformative power.
    Secular discussions of Thomas usually become mired in moral, literal and allegorical techniques of interpretation, accompanied by their sociological congeners. The hermeneus who will meet the challenge of the Gospel of Thomas’ incipit needs enlist another type of hermeneutic technique – a technique hidden and obvious, ancient and modern, simple and complex. Unfortunately our human record documents well that this technique avails only those who have ears attuned to hear it. Without the grace of that gift, the hermeneutics of vision is an obscure and meaningless concept.

    Last edited: Dec 18, 2015
  6. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Dear Office!

    I joined your party last week and have composed an article on and about the infiltrating islamization of the western civilization.

    I am sending this email with a pdf attached, which might be of use for the political efforts to inform the general population about the seriousness of the islamization of western civilization.
    I invite your political organization to use this material in any way suitable for your agenda. There is no copyright. The pdf file does not show the supportive videoed evidence and the link to my website below, will allow access to the pdf file in a more accessible format.

    I realise my contribution is rather academic and uses both theological and scientific nomenclature. So I would ask for your office to pass this, in my opinion important material and information on to people who are able to follow the discourse. Your office is of course welcome to use any or parts in any kind of editorial mode in your own press releases.
    Our problem is of course, and anyone who peruses this article should realise this; that we have little chance to address a wider populus using the mainstream media.
    As your proponents have experienced, in the western civilized world, it are the proponents for free speech and individual freedom, who become the terrorists, racists and islamophobists, in critisizing a century old political ideology and not the ‘mentally hijacked’ political prisoners of that ideology. The islamic worldview is masquerading itself as a religion and utilizing the legislated ‘freedom of religion’ in its well organized, but highly deceptive agendas to undermine and replace the jurisdictions they operate in.
    As this article should make clear, the agenda is a global caliphate under sharia law, declared by Baghdadi in 2014 and this after the last caliphate was abolished by Ataturk in the collapse of the ottoman empire in 1924.

    This timeframe then became the laudable event of a previous islamic political system to secularise and modernise and something the current western administration apparently believe to be the status quo in the present crisis.

    Civic independence and the Caliphate, 1924–1925

    Abolition of the Caliphate was an important dimension in Mustafa Kemal's drive to reform the political system and to promote the national sovereignty. By the consensus of the Muslim majority in early centuries, the caliphate was the core political concept of Sunni Islam.[69] Abolishing the sultanate was easier because the survival of the Caliphate at the time satisfied the partisans of the sultanate. This produced a split system with the new republic on one side and an Islamic form of government with the Caliph on the other side, and Mustafa Kemal and İnönü worried that "it nourished the expectations that the sovereign would return under the guise of Caliph."[70] Caliph Abdülmecid II was elected after the abolition of the sultanate (1922).

    The caliph had his own personal treasury and also had a personal service that included military personnel; Mustafa Kemal said that there was no "religious" or "political" justification for this. He believed that Caliph Abdülmecid II was following in the steps of the sultans in domestic and foreign affairs: accepting of and responding to foreign representatives and reserve officers, and participating in official ceremonies and celebrations.[71] He wanted to integrate the powers of the caliphate into the powers of the GNA. His initial activities began on 1 January 1924, when[71] İnönü, Çakmak and Özalp consented to the abolition of the caliphate. The caliph made a statement to the effect that he would not interfere with political affairs.[72] On 1 March 1924, at the Assembly, Mustafa Kemal said:

    The religion of Islam will be elevated if it will cease to be a political instrument, as had been the case in the past.[73]

    On 3 March 1924, the caliphate was officially abolished and its powers within Turkey were transferred to the GNA. Other Muslim nations debated the validity of Turkey's unilateral abolition of the caliphate as they decided whether they should confirm the Turkish action or appoint a new caliph.[72] A "Caliphate Conference" was held in Cairo in May 1926 and a resolution was passed declaring the caliphate "a necessity in Islam", but failed to implement this decision.[72]

    Two other Islamic conferences were held in Mecca (1926) and Jerusalem (1931), but failed to reach a consensus.[72] Turkey did not accept the re-establishment of the caliphate and perceived it as an attack to its basic existence; while Mustafa Kemal and the reformists continued their own way.[74]

    On 8 April 1924, sharia courts were abolished with the law "Mehakim-i Şer'iyenin İlgasına ve Mehakim Teşkilatına Ait Ahkamı Muaddil Kanun".[75][76]

    The removal of the caliphate was followed by an extensive effort to establish the separation of governmental and religious affairs. Education was the cornerstone in this effort. In 1923, there were three main educational groups of institutions. The most common institutions were medreses based on Arabic, the Qur'an and memorization. The second type of institution was idadî and sultanî, the reformist schools of the Tanzimat era. The last group included colleges and minority schools in foreign languages that used the latest teaching models in educating pupils. The old medrese education was modernized.[77] Mustafa Kemal changed the classical Islamic education for a vigorously promoted reconstruction of educational institutions.[77] Mustafa Kemal linked educational reform to the liberation of the nation from dogma, which he believed was more important than the Turkish War of Independence. He declared:

    Today, our most important and most productive task is the national education [unification and modernization] affairs. We have to be successful in national education affairs and we shall be. The liberation of a nation is only achieved through this way."[78]

    In the summer of 1924, Mustafa Kemal invited American educational reformer John Dewey to Ankara to advise him on how to reform Turkish education.[77] His public education reforms aimed to prepare citizens for roles in public life through increasing the public literacy. He wanted to institute compulsory primary education for both girls and boys; since then this effort has been an ongoing task for the republic. He pointed out that one of the main targets of education in Turkey had to be raising a generation nourished with what he called the "public culture". The state schools established a common curriculum which became known as the "unification of education."
    Unification of education was put into force on 3 March 1924 by the Law on Unification of Education (No. 430). With the new law, education became inclusive, organized on a model of the civil community. In this new design, all schools submitted their curriculum to the "Ministry of National Education", a government agency modelled after other countries' ministries of education. Concurrently, the republic abolished the two ministries and made clergy subordinate to the department of religious affairs, one of the foundations of secularism in Turkey. The unification of education under one curriculum ended "clerics or clergy of the Ottoman Empire", but was not the end of religious schools in Turkey; they were moved to higher education until later governments restored them to their former position in secondary after Mustafa Kemal's death.


    Atatürk with his Panama hat just after the Kastamonu speech in 1925.

    Beginning in the fall of 1925, Mustafa Kemal encouraged the Turks to wear modern European attire.[79] He was determined to force the abandonment of the sartorial traditions of the Middle East and finalize a series of dress reforms, which were originally started by Mahmud II.[79] The fez was established by Sultan Mahmud II in 1826 as part of the Ottoman Empire's modernization effort. The Hat Law of 1925 introduced the use of Western-style hats instead of the fez. Mustafa Kemal first made the hat compulsory for civil servants.[79] The guidelines for the proper dressing of students and state employees were passed during his lifetime; many civil servants adopted the hat willingly. In 1925, Mustafa Kemal wore his "Panama hat" during a public appearance in Kastamonu, one of the most conservative towns in Anatolia, to explain that the hat was the headgear of civilized nations. The last part of reform on dress emphasized the need to wear modern Western suits with neckties as well as Fedora and Derby-style hats instead of antiquated religion-based clothing such as the veil and turban in the Law Relating to Prohibited Garments of 1934.
    Even though he personally promoted modern dress for women, Mustafa Kemal never made specific reference to women's clothing in the law, as he believed that women would adapt to the new clothing styles of their own free will. He was frequently photographed on public business with his wife Lâtife Uşaklıgil, who covered her head in accordance with Islamic tradition. He was also frequently photographed on public business with women wearing modern Western clothes. But it was Atatürk's adopted daughters, Sabiha Gökçen and Afet İnan, who provided the real role model for the Turkish women of the future. He wrote: "The religious covering of women will not cause difficulty ... This simple style [of headcovering] is not in conflict with the morals and manners of our society."[80]
    On 30 August 1925, Mustafa Kemal's view on religious insignia used outside places of worship was introduced in his Kastamonu speech. This speech also had another position. He said:

    In the face of knowledge, science, and of the whole extent of radiant civilization, I cannot accept the presence in Turkey's civilized community of people primitive enough to seek material and spiritual benefits in the guidance of sheiks. The Turkish republic cannot be a country of sheiks, dervishes, and disciples. The best, the truest order is the order of civilization. To be a man it is enough to carry out the requirements of civilization. The leaders of dervish orders will understand the truth of my words, and will themselves close down their lodges [tekke] and admit that their disciplines have grown up.[81][82]

    On 2 September, the government issued a decree closing down all Sufi orders and the tekkes. Mustafa Kemal ordered their dervish lodges to be converted to museums, such as Mevlana Museum in Konya. The institutional expression of Sufism became illegal in Turkey; a politically neutral form of Sufism, functioning as social associations, was permitted to exist.[citation needed]
    The abolition of the caliphate and other cultural reforms were met with fierce opposition. The conservative elements were not happy and they launched attacks on the Kemalist reformists.[72]

    How far removed from those statements are the present declarations and proclamations of ‘Islamic State?'
    And yes, it is a state, if recognised by a brainwashed and fact challenged political, intellectual, media and elitist class in the west notwithstanding. In terms of the 1+ billion muslims in the world, the Islamic State in Syria is their ‘Nation Islam’ and since it exists, those 1+ billion muslims are ordered by their holy book of the Qu’ran to forfeit all allegiances to the states and countries they might reside in and to expect a worldwide exodus into their ‘promised utopian land’ within ten years according to their ‘prophecies’ and calculations.
    Beginning with the life of Muhammad and the supposed creation of the Qu’ran (who did not exist, surprise, surprise, but became an invention by the administrators, both clerical and military of the occupied territory of christendom's Byzantine) and with the fall of Constantinople-Istanbul in 1453 as its midpoint and so pointing to a 2025 ‘time of the end’ according to their reckonings.
    In other words, the present intensity of the terrorist attacks by the general unassimilatable muslims relates to a genuine expectation by a worldwide ‘Islamic Brotherhood’ having a 57 islamic nation voting block in the UN, to have infiltrated the west enough to by then be able to establish their ‘utopian sharia law based’ caliphate.

    How to inform a media brainwashed public about those factual realities and circumvent the apathetic lunatic and insane multicultural nightmare with regards to the by definition incompatible ideologies between the rational-scientific-secular but toothless Christian west and Islam in any civilized manner possible, so becomes a task for the remnant of common-sensical people in Australia and of course the political west.
    Sweden is bordering on collapse and as we know, London and Paris and Brussels are not far behind.
    In the global ‘oil supply crisis’ of the early 1970’s the forerunners of our present crop of economistical politicians sold out to Saudi Arabia in asking for a secure oil supply in exchange of allowing the ‘petro dollar’ to begin a frenzy of mosque building in all of the 'ransoming' countries and who basically sold out their millennia old cultural heritages for oil in apparently still binding contracts and agreements

    Well this is why we formed this party is it not?

    Tony Bermanseder

    The Ontological Metaphysics behind the Physical Manifesto of Islam
    The Jihad of Islam and the Hadji of Logos

    The Resistance or Counter Movement to the Islamisation of Western Civilization by the Rationalisation of Fundamental Christianity as an Eschatological Alternative to Islam's "Islamic Nation" as a Politico-Religious Movement and Organization.

    An Open letter to all liberty centred individuals and political affiliates or friends of Roger Spencer, Pamela Geller and Geert Wilders.
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2015
  7. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Dear Jacquie!

    I am sending this letter to you to in response to the ridicule you experienced in this interview:

    It is very easy to expose Islam as the political theocratic totalitarian system it is and the accusations against you of being misinformed or underinformed about things Islamic applies to all of your political opponents and include educated and well meaning folks including the prime minister who in the house stated on November 24th, 2015 in earnest opinion that "Islam is the enemy of Islamic State!"

    This statement is erroneous in its very core as the entire history of how the Arab worldview regarding its culture and civilization revolves about its cultural identity and the notion of what a muslim is.
    Around 550AD the 'Old Rome' of the empire had lost its political influence, but the 'New Rome' centered at Constantinople, now Istanbul in Turkey still remained as its remnant.
    It though was warring against the Persian empire as its competitor for territorial domination.
    This created a war related vacuum, which the then Arabian land used to expand its own borders. Because of the weakness and decay of the older powers, they invaded and over the next century began to dominate and occupy their expanding empire.

    It was then, when islam was born as a necessary method of clerical domination of the occupied territories to support the control by a basically military agenda.
    Remnants of the religions in Byzantine Christendom included the idea of the 'Krystos' and the symbolism of the early New Testament as well as the 'conquering' model of Moses loyal to Jehovah, the god of the Jews and Israelites. The Arabs, they were not muslims from the start but Arabs, were following some pagan religion like any other culture or tribes on the planet at that time, except the ones we now call 'world religions'.

    So this is the reason why Jesus is in the Qu'ran. The clerical administrators required symbols and figures of authority to further their political control structures in their expanding empire, expanding of course by military invasion and just as is the case today with Islamic Sate.
    Islam is not a religion, but uses religion to further its political motivation to grow its 'New Arabia' as a globally dominating form of administration.
    The ultimate aim, easily explored by anyone, is to form a 'New Nation Islam' as a worldwide caliphate.

    This 'Great Islamic Nation' then existed in the political sense since the time of Muhammad, himself created as an authority figure by the said clerics as the politically motivated tool of the caliphs, say the kings and rulers.
    In 1453 Constantinople became fully integrated in the 'Universal Islamic Brotherhood' and the muslimisation proceeded on the historical lines in competition with other 'kingdoms' or nations as is the case today. However in 1924 the caliphate in Turkey was abandoned by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and with it the control of the clerics.
    It was then that Islam became moderate and the separation of religion and state was actual fact.
    It lasted however only until Mustafa Kemal Ataturk died and as you can easily confirm, the Arab muslim world resisted any such 'reforms' vehemently from the start.

    But the shortlived attempt to 'modernise' Islam, which can only be done by removing the power of administration from the clerics, occurred then and has brainwashed the western administrators and politicians.
    A similar attempt to 'modernise' and to secularise islam was attempted in Persia, until the western friendly Shah of Iran was forced into exile by the Ayatollah Khomeini and the real anti-westernization leading to todays Islamic State occurred in 1979.

    There was an 'oil crisis' in the early 70's and to ensure supplies, many western administrations prioritized the continuity of energy supply over their principles and signed or made agreements with the financial centre of the Arabic Islamic brotherhood, which is of course Saudi Arabia today.
    The agreement basically allowed the integration of Islam into the western culture in construction of mosques and Islamic centers throughout the places and nations with whom the agreemens were made.
    Now remember there was no caliphate since Mustafa Kemal Ataturk abolished it in 1924.

    On June 29th, 2014, Baghdadi declared the caliphate of ISIL of the Islamic State in the Levant including an extension of Syria into Iraq and Lebanon and also including Israel.
    This declaration was accepted by the 'Muslim Brotherhood' which has a 57 nation voting block in the UN, if not openly in the 'political correct' form, but in its form of the basic tenets found in the Qu'ran and in the libraries.
    So since June 2014 a caliphate of 'New Worldwide Nation Islam' exists and its mere existence suffices to allow ANY muslim to forfeit all allegiances or loyalties to wherever they might live or find themselves as 'unassimilated' or 'not integrated'. Once the worldwide Ummah or 'Muslim family' as its own statehood, it alone deserves allegiance and loyalty according to the Qu'ran.

    The consequence is an increasing shift of loyalty by the Ummah from their past attempts to integrate, like Turkey and Iran, to a future perspective of a worldwide rule of shariah law under the auspices of a theocratic totalitarianism.
    Political solutions are not possible; the only way out is to reform the Qu'ran or the division of the state and the theology. The first option is impossible without 'a new Islamic prophet' and personages like Osama bin Laden and Baghdadi are such 'prophets' with the sole aim to create the global caliphate and so reformation of the Islamic 'holy book' is highly unlikely.
    The second option also has failed as the attempts in Turkey and Iran have shown.

    So I end here and I would be available to help you with further advice, if required.
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2015
  8. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member


    Israel and Palestine - Facts and Fictions

    We cannot pretend, as Malcolm Turnbull does, that Islam is as cheek-turning as Christianity

    October 14, 2015 9:00pm
    ANDREW BOLT - Herald Sun:

    Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.​

    MALCOLM Turnbull is very right to reach out to Australian Muslims. He is wrong, though, to tell untruths to non-Muslims. And the Prime Minister, a Catholic, is particularly wrong to suggest that a key moral teaching of Christianity — a “golden rule” — is that of Islam, too.

    Last week Turnbull urged “mutual respect” between Muslim and non-Muslim Australians, even though most of the disrespect so far — as measured by bomb plots, sieges and attacks on police — seem to come from the extremist Muslim side.
    Still, mutual respect is indeed critical if we’re not going to kill each other, so give Turnbull credit for at least winning the trust of many Muslim leaders.

    But to back his appeal he added this: “Every religion, every faith, every moral doctrine, understands the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    First, an apology. I’m going to quote Christian and Islamic scripture.
    Heavy, I know. But too many of us have forgotten how Christianity shaped our society, and are blind to how the Koran created radically different societies.

    If we don’t understand those things, we’re clueless in dealing with the cultural clash we’ve so recklessly imported into our own suburbs.
    What Turnbull claims is the “Golden Rule” of all faiths is in fact a direct quotation from just one — from the Christians’ New Testament.

    Luke’s Gospel quotes the alleged words of Jesus Christ himself: “Love your enemies … If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also … Do to others as you would have them do to you.”

    Ultra-Orthodox Jews at the site of one of the stabbings in Jerusalem.​

    These are powerful words of immense resonance in Christian countries, even if hardly a Christian alive has lived up to this ideal.

    It’s this ideal that gives such moral weight to Turnbull’s offer of “mutual respect” to a community that has produced 21 jihadists jailed for terrorism offences, and three more shot dead during attacks.
    But contrast Christ’s “Golden Rule” and turning of the cheek with the Koran’s commands to strike hard at the enemy: “The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger ... will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land.”

    True, the sacred Hadith do quote the Muslims’ prophet Muhammad, founder of their faith, stating: “None of you have faith until you love for your neighbour what you love for yourself.” But that version of the “Golden Rule” seems limited to fellow Muslims, and has been interpreted that way by many scholars for many centuries.
    No wonder, given that the Koran and Hadith give repeated examples of Muhammad and his followers killing his critics, including even women and poets who mocked him.

    No turning of the cheek there.

    In vivid contrast, Christ would not let his disciples fight even to save him from capture and crucifixion.
    There is another critical difference between the two religions that has helped set up this clash here of Christian and Muslim cultures.
    The Jesus of the Gospels drew a line between church and state, which is why the Christian West has secular governments, not religious ones such as Iran’s and Saudi Arabia, which even bans the public practice of Christianity.

    As John’s Gospel notes: “Jesus replied, ‘Mine is not a kingdom of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, my men would have fought to prevent my being surrendered to the Jews.” And from Matthew, when Jesus was asked whether fellow Jews should pay taxes to the pagan Roman emperor: “Pay Caesar what belongs to Caesar — and God what belongs to God.”

    In the Koran, the message is very different. Muslims should live under Muslim law where possible: “Allah hath sent down no authority: the command is for none but Allah ...”

    This is why extremists refuse to stand in court for our judges or call our democracy “haram” — sinful.
    Moreover, the sacred Sahih Muslim urges Muslims to make nonbelievers submit to Muslim rule.

    “Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them,” it says. “If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya (a tax on unbelievers) … If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them.”

    True, many Muslims do not live up to these ideals and don’t want to, either. But it is foolish to pretend these Koranic teachings don’t exist or aren’t influential.

    For instance, the Islamic State quoted holy scripture at least 25 times in its infamous statement last year ordering Muslims around the world to kill unbelievers — to “smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car”.
    Those quotations included this, from the Koran: “Kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush.”

    Last week gave another example of Muslim preachers citing the Koran to urge the killing of unbelievers.
    Israel’s Jews have suffered a wave of stabbings by young Muslims over the past fortnight. On Tuesday alone there were four attacks. In the worst, two men got on board a public bus, locked the doors and shot and stabbed passengers, killing two.

    In another, a driver rammed his car into people at a bus stop and jumped out to hack at his victims with a knife, killing an elderly rabbi.
    What motivates such savagery?
    Here’s a clue. Giving the Friday sermon last week at the Al-Abrar Mosque in the Gaza strip, Sheik Muhammad Sallah waved around a knife and shouted for Muslims to stab Israeli Jews. “Attack in threes and fours,” he bellowed, and “cut them into body parts. Some should restrain the victim, while others attack him with axes and butcher knives.”

    And to justify this slaughter he quoted the example of Muhammad himself — “recall what He did to them in Khaybar” — in attacking and subjugating a Jewish tribe in a battle in 629.
    Yes, moderate Muslims insist other parts of the Koran invalidate the passages quoted by extremists.

    Good luck to them. Let’s back their attempts to reform Islam and make it safe for our multi-religious secular democracy. But to reform Islam we must first admit there is something to reform. We cannot pretend, as Turnbull does, that Islam is as cheek-turning as Christianity.
    Leave Islam out of the discussion and we’re just left with all this useless yammer about terrorism just being about “marginalised” youths facing “discrimination” and needing only a job or sympathetic ear to become as peaceful as, well, Buddhists or Presbyterians. And we then get the list of demands from people from whom more should be demanded — demands to ban criticism of Islam, to issue more grants and to scrap foreign policies that help Israel or hurt Islamist groups abroad.
    No, Islam needs reform. Without that, we’re left only with only two dark choices: submission or even more policing of our streets and our tongues.

    On November 24th, 2015, the Australian Prime Minister (Liberal Conservative Party) stated: "Islam is the enemy of Islamic State!" - An unaffiliated politically incorrect observer would ask: Really???

    This statement is 'believed' by 80%-90% of all western political administration, irrespective of their intranational political persuasions.

    Last edited: Nov 24, 2015
  9. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Here is a perspective by Dr. Peter Hammond, who was born in Cape Town in 1960, grew up in Rhodesia and converted to Christianity . . .

    Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam:

    The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat

    Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult.
    In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

    Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components.
    The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.

    Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.
    When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well.

    Here's how it works:
    As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to other citizens.
    This is the case in:

    United States -- Muslim 0.6%
    Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
    Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
    China -- Muslim 1.8%
    Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
    Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

    At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.
    This is happening in:

    Denmark -- Muslim 2%
    Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
    United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
    Spain -- Muslim 4%
    Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

    From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
    For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims.
    They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply.
    This is occurring in:

    France -- Muslim 8%
    Philippines -- 5%
    Sweden -- Muslim 5%
    Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
    The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
    Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

    At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
    When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions.
    In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.
    Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:

    Guyana -- Muslim 10%
    India -- Muslim 13.4%
    Israel -- Muslim 16%
    Kenya -- Muslim 10%
    Russia -- Muslim 15%

    After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

    Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

    At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

    Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
    Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
    Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

    From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

    Albania -- Muslim 70%
    Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
    Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
    Sudan -- Muslim 70%

    After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

    Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
    Egypt -- Muslim 90%
    Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
    Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
    Iran -- Muslim 98%
    Iraq -- Muslim 97%
    Jordan -- Muslim 92%
    Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
    Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
    Palestine -- Muslim 99%
    Syria -- Muslim 90%
    Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
    Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
    United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

    100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here, there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:

    Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%
    Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%
    Somalia -- Muslim 100%
    Yemen -- Muslim 100%

    Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

    ‘Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel.’ -- Leon Uris, The Haj.

    It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law.

    The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities.
    In such situations, Muslims do not integrate in to the community at large. The children attend Madrasses. They learn only the Koran.
    To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death.

    Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.

    Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population.
    But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers.
    Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.

    Food for Thought Bob?

    Unfortunately the appropriate analysis and unbiased and multinational, albeit not multicultural assessment of the global situation.
    You see the planetary society is indeed interwoven in local groups of whatever political, religious and cultural persuasions, but some cultures are more civilized and have evolved in their histories, whilst other cultures have remained timewarped and 'stuck' in rather primitive militaristic and relative to other cultures primitive, culturally and barbaric and truly RACIST fearful mentalities.
    Nabsers and associated wanna be 'truth disseminators' are not excluded from this unbiased and non-judgemental observations of their self-biased opinionated misinformed and self-righteous relativisms.

    Thank you for an excellent sharing of true 'alternative' information, not published in the mainstream media. The actual 'truth movement' and alternative media not brainwashed by the mainstream ignorance of truth-relative 'politically correct' and islam-ideological apologetic opinionated blabberings.

    Any religion, totalitarian and disguising its oolitical agenda under the label of being a religion, which openly admits, that it is ok to lie and perceive anyone and anything in the name of furthering its own 'glovbal agenda' cannot be compared to any other religion or or philosophy which does not follow such an agenda.
    Islam Permits Lying to Deceive Unbelievers and Bring World Domination!

    By Don Boys, Ph.D.
    Published Nov 17, 2004

    deception; the islamic word for concealing or disguising one’s beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies.

    It is impossible to understand Islam and Muslims by listening to their protestations against terror and their proclamations of patriotism for America. Usually, it is wise and fair to give people the benefit of the doubt but when it comes to national safety and the future of America, we had better look twice, even thrice at Muslim patriotism. Why? Because Islam permits lying! It is called “Al-taqiyya.” One Muslim said that Al-taqiyya means dissimulation then he expanded it to diplomacy but he should have gone further to deception. Now some Muslims who do not follow the Koran are as faithful Americans as any of us, but the problem is, we cannot know.
    Muslims lie not because they are liars by nature but by choice. Systematic lying as a religious policy is deadly, and if our politicians do not understand this, thousands could die.
    It seems our President and his advisors are clueless as to the desires, doctrines, and distinctives of Islam. While I feel a little audacious in giving advice to national leaders, it is necessary since no one else is doing it. Muslims lie not because they are liars by nature but by choice. Systematic lying as a religious policy is deadly, and if our politicians do not understand this, thousands could die.
    Muslims lie when it is in their interest to do so and “Allah” will not hold them accountable for lying when it is beneficial to the cause of Islam. They can lie without any guilt or fear of accountability or retribution. A lie in the defense of Islam is approved even applauded in their “holy” books.
    Muslims are permitted to lie: (1) to save their lives, (2) to reconcile a husband and wife, (3) to persuade a woman into a bedroom and (4) to facilitate one on his journey. Muslims are even permitted to disavow Islam and Mohammed if it is not a genuine heart-felt rejection. Muslims will tell you that concealment of a truth is not an abandonment of that truth if it benefits Islam.

    Mohammed gave permission for a follower to lie in order to kill a Jewish poet who had offended Mohammed. I could provide many examples of permissible lying from the Koran and Hadith and will do so when my critics accuse me of hatred and bigotry because of this column. My motives are not important but the truth is. However, many unprincipled people do not consider truth important. It is political correctness that sits on the throne to be worshiped.
    Muslims may appear very sincere; in fact, they are sincere, when they lie for their own protection or in the cause of Islam. They have permission to lie. Yes, Christians have also lied but never are they given permission to lie. However, a Muslim has no guilt since the Koran and Hadith permit his deception.
    Muslims have no hope for eternal salvation without their good works, so they must keep working to advance Islam. If a few lies will accomplish that goal, then lying is not bad but good. If they can get good publicity for Islam by lying, then lying is acceptable, even desirable.
    They will lie to make Islam more attractive to potential converts as they speak of “no compulsion in religion” while all of them know that verse was abrogated by later verses. They will quote verses that speak of tolerance and kindness knowing that those verses were written when Mohammed was desirous of “tolerance and kindness,” but when he climbed into the catbird seat, everything changed and he became a terrorist.
    Muslims have no hope for eternal salvation without their good works, so they must keep working to advance Islam. If a few lies will accomplish that goal, then lying is not bad but good. If they can get good publicity for Islam by lying, then lying is acceptable, even desirable. The Muslim is earning his way to heaven by lying to a non-Muslim.
    Unlike Christians who are saved once for all by the grace of God through faith in Christ’s propitiatory death, no Muslim knows for sure if his works are good enough for Heaven. The only Muslim who knows for sure that his eternal destiny is secure and he will drop into a delightful garden filled with 72 virgins on soft green cushions is the one who dies while “taking out” unbelievers in Islam.

    Most Muslims will not have the “opportunity” to become a martyr in this war between Islam and the rest of the world and make no mistake every true Muslim must be involved in making America (or the nation where he lives) a Muslim nation. Since Muslims are limited in their ability to die for the cause, they can help the cause by supporting terrorists with money, succor, and cover. Sure, they are aiding terror against the U.S. but since they believe they are doing Allah’s will, then any deception is acceptable.
    How should this affect America’s war on terror? Officials must look closely at every Muslim chaplain in the military and in our prisons; also look at those involved in the CIA, FBI, and other sensitive areas; look at all Arabic translators, military or civilian; look at all Muslim employees at the Pentagon, White House, atomic power plants, and in Congress; look at all civilian Muslim pilots; look at Muslim clerics in all U.S. mosques. In other words, get serious about this war before our cities are rubble.
    Our President must stop playing the game of “Let’s Stop the Terrorists” and get serious by going to the heart of the matter. This war on terror is a religious matter and could become a Hundred Years’ War. To resurrect an old slogan: You can trust the Muslims to be Muslims. They are lying their way to world domination!

    Watch al-Taqiyya in action as it pours from the lips of Altaf Ali, Executive Director of C.A.I.R. in Florida as he gives sidewalk interviews next to a demonstration against C.A.I.R. sponsored Islamic Propaganda on appearing in ads placed on county buses.

    Another good example of al Taqiyya (al Taqiya)
    A Muslim woman deceived a Christian school by not wearing a Burqa to the job interview, but showed up to work wearing one.

    "The strangest and most untrue thing that can be said about Islam is that it is a Religion of Peace. If every standard by which the West is judged and condemned (slavery, imperialism, intolerance, misogyny, sexual repression, warfare...) were applied equally to Islam, the verdict would be devastating. Islam never gives up what it conquers, be it religion, culture, language or life. Neither does it make apologies or any real effort at moral progress. It is the least open to dialogue and the most self-absorbed. It is convinced of its own perfection, yet brutally shuns self-examination and represses criticism.

    This is what makes the Quran's verses of violence so dangerous. They are given the weight of divine command. While Muslim terrorists take them as literally as anything else in their holy book, and understand that Islam is incomplete without Jihad, moderates offer little to contradict them - outside of personal opinion. Indeed, what do they have? Speaking of peace and love may win over the ignorant, but when every twelfth verse of Islam's holiest book either speaks to Allah's hatred for non-Muslims or calls for their death, forced conversion, or subjugation, it's little wonder that sympathy for terrorism runs as deeply as it does in the broader community - even if most Muslims personally prefer not to interpret their religion in this way.

    Although scholars like Ibn Khaldun, one of Islam's most respected philosophers, understood that "the holy war 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", many other Muslims are either unaware or willfully ignorant of the Quran's near absence of verses that preach universal non-violence. Their understanding of Islam comes from what they are taught by others. In the West, it is typical for believers to think that their religion must be like Christianity - preaching the New Testament virtues of peace, love, and tolerance - because Muslims are taught that Islam is supposed to be superior in every way. They are somewhat surprised and embarrassed to find that this is contradicted by the Quran and the bloody history of Islam's genesis.

    Others simply accept the violence. In 1991, a Palestinian couple in America was convicted of stabbing their daughter to death for being too Westernized. A family friend came to their defense, excoriating the jury for not understanding the "culture", claiming that the father was merely following "the religion" and saying that the couple had to "discipline their daughter or lose respect." (source). In 2011, unrepentant Palestinian terrorists, responsible for the brutal murders of civilians, women and children explicitly in the name of Allah were treated to a luxurious "holy pilgrimage" to Mecca by the Saudi king - without a single Muslim voice raised in protest.

    For their part, Western liberals would do well not to sacrifice critical thinking to the god of political correctness, or look for reasons to bring other religion down to the level of Islam merely to avoid the existential truth that this it is both different and dangerous.

    There are just too many Muslims who take the Quran literally... and too many others who couldn't care less about the violence done in the name of Islam."
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2015
  10. admin

    admin Well-Known Member Staff Member

    i_icon_online. shiloh


    Posts: 978
    Join date: 2011-03-16
    Age: 58
    Location: Akbar Ra
    • Post n°15

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. shiloh Today at 9:05 am
    bobhardee wrote:

    What we have here in America is truly a precious and holy thing. We are in a place in which a different form of Democracy has taken hold. We have been blessed. Our freedom is based on our belief that Church and State are held separate and the belief that you can worship your God of choice. The question that we are now beginning to examine is can we stand firm on that "Right" if there is a religion that advocates a complete paradigm change advocating violence, political takeover, extremely limiting women's rights, and exclusion to any and all who are not converts.

    I do not know the answer to that question. My fear is it is one that we (of the free world) will be dealing with that belief system for years to come.

    We (the USA) are not without our faults. Our mistakes. Our problems. We have and still have many things that need to be addressed. However, to ignore a philosophy that is raging a war with the world is not a good idea. We must begin to have a dialog that includes how we are going to define the right of Church and State and worship of a God.

    I am reminded of a story of the woman who found a snake that had been hurt and took the snake into her home and nursed it back to health. She and the snake got along fine at first but one day the snake bit her. When she asked the snake why he did that, his response was that "I am a snake and it is what I do."

    In the past when we have had "hate" groups to push their agenda, our government and support groups has used what ever means necessary to break up and interfere with these organizations. They have helped subdue them. They have not stopped them for that are still among us today and every so often raise their head and are ready to strike just like the snake in the above paragraph.

    My father said that the only people who ever joined the KKK were the rejects of the rejects. From what I could tell, he was right. If my father were alive, I believe he would say that what the world is dealing with now is similar but different that anything that has confronted us before. The road ahead is difficult. This morning Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet. What lies ahead in the coming holidays are yet to be seen but this country is on alert much like many others.

    All of this is due to a belief system that advocates hatred of anyone different, who doesn't toe the line or conform to a way of life that is way different than mine.

    Just some thoughts that I felt the need to share.
    Bob H.


    Posts: 4550
    Join date: 2010-04-09
    Location: Poland
    • Post n°12

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. burgundia Yesterday at 12:36 pm
    bobhardee wrote: 11/24/2015
    What we have here....

    Do you really believe in what you wrote here? I don't.


    Posts: 2055
    Join date: 2012-09-08
    Location: Sand Hills of South Carolina
    • Post n°13

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. bobhardee Yesterday at 8:17 pm

    I am not a very good writer. For some writing comes natural. Not so much for me.
    Do I believe in what I wrote?
    Yes. I had edited out a question in the first paragraph and should have changed the second paragraph which answered the question but other than that change, I have no issue what I have posted. Is it politically correct? Absolutely not. Is it biased? Yes. I don't like it when there is a religious doctrine that advocates violence and now there are a significant number of people who are trying to follow their faith by killing random.

    Back in the late 60's and early 70's when US troops would provide medical aid to children in Nam and the VC would find out about it, they would come in and kill the kids. Sometimes they would even go so far as to hang them from poles outside the village. It was not what made headlines. War is not something that I advocate for. It is where man's hidden evil side surfaces.

    I had a hard enough time going to war because my country asked me to do so. I cannot begin to fathom the idea that a "religion" in this day and time would suggest war. I sure wouldn't go to that church. But there are a lot of folks who do.....and in countries where this religion has become a significant part of the population, trouble has started. Now why is that Burgundia?

    In France our allies are not fighting another nation. They are not fighting a political system. They are fighting the right wing of a religion. Our government does everything it can to deny that we are in a religious war.
    How crazy is that?

    Somehow, when we put our political correctness aside, we will address the question of Church and State if the church in question advocates violence, should it be allowed the same protection offered to others.
    Bob H.


    Posts: 550
    Join date: 2015-04-24
    Location: Canada
    • Post n°14

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. Pris Yesterday at 9:38 pm
    bobhardee wrote: 11/24/2015
    What we have here....

    There is nothing 'truly precious' and 'holy' about America. Even if democracy was a good thing -- which it isn't -- America has no democracy, period. It's governed by corporatocracy and plutocracy. You've been 'blessed' alright, and the blood continues to be shed on the altar of the world.

    Freedom has absolutely nothing to do with 'Church and State'. Replace 'freedom' with 'slavery'. Worship whatever you want, but I do not worship any god. Now, that is choice. All religions are a form of slavery. All governments are a form of slavery. They are two faces of the same coin and the controllers know it. Their function is to keep you in chains.

    There is no such thing as a 'free world'. Look around at your cage bars. You've given all your power away.

    This is about love -- to wake people up to their own, personal power -- physically and spiritually. Stand under no one. You have forgotten how precious you are.


    Posts: 978
    Join date: 2011-03-16
    Age: 58
    Location: Akbar Ra
    • Post n°15

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. shiloh Today at 3:05 am

    The solution will not be political or cultural, the solution will be metaphysical (spiritual)!​

    Shiloh Za-RaH hidden-09.


    Posts: 4550
    Join date: 2010-04-09
    Location: Poland
    • Post n°16

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. burgundia Today at 5:01 am
    Pris wrote:
    bobhardee wrote:11/24/2015
    What we have here...

    There is nothing...

    Now, I can agree with that.

    i_icon_online. shiloh


    Posts: 979
    Join date: 2011-03-16
    Age: 58
    Location: Akbar Ra
    • Post n°19

    empty. Re: FRANCE NOW

    empty. shiloh Today at 6:05 am
    Pris wrote:

    orthodoxymoron wrote:

    Perhaps We Need a Real Good God to Make Things Real Good.

    There's no such thing as a 'good god'. You're joking, right? Either that or you are missing the whole point.

    If you mean looking around at the f***** up world and saying, "What the f*** have we done?", that might be a good start.

    at-painter. at-logo.

    November 25, 2015

    The Strange Case of the Secular Progressive-Islamist Alliance

    By Marvin Folkertsma

    One of the frequently cited quips in the halls of Congress is that politics makes for strange bedfellows, meaning that some alliances between Democrats and Republicans, especially given today's toxic environment in Washington, are hard to fathom. However, perhaps even more difficult to understand is the strange affinity that has developed over the past two decades between Islamists – radical Muslims – and the American progressive movement, or what Michael Walsh has termed the "unholy left."

    At first glance, the two entities seem utterly different – one proceeding from the darker recesses of Islamic culture, and the other a seemingly quintessential product of American idealism. In fact, however, what we find between the two political movements is a confluence of interests and perspectives on a variety of matters. Indeed, often the affinity of these two outlooks is frightening.
    For instance, both share an animus bordering on hatred for Christianity and Judaism, with the secular progressives trying to expunge Christians from public life, while Islamists yearn to annihilate Jews. Certainly, academic progressives do nothing to discourage the anti-Semitic hatred of Muslims from being expressed on American campuses, as David Horowitz recently pointed out. Why, he wonders, do prominent American universities, such as Brandeis and UCLA, permit offshoots of the Muslim Brotherhood to have free rein on their campuses? "Any other group that preached hatred of ethnic groups or supported barbaric terrorists who slaughter men, women and children as part of a demented mission to cleanse the earth of infidels would face campus sanctions, disciplinary action, and be charged with conduct code violations."

    But apparently this doesn't bother secular progressives, who dominate American higher education. Quite the contrary: progressives luxuriate in moralistic narcissism whenever presented with the opportunity to condemn "primitive thinkers" for "Islamophobia," sometimes even after radical Muslims have perpetrated some horrific attack, as in the Fort Hood massacre. And other times, it just takes a youngster falsely accused of bringing a bomb to school, which turned out to be a homemade clock, to trigger progressive sensibilities: "Finally," crowed The Daily Beast, "the Muslim hero America has been waiting for." In fact, Ahmed Mohamed's little exercise earned him a visit to the White House and a note of encouragement from Hillary Clinton. He later departed with his family for the apparently more agreeable clime of Qatar, a Muslim country. Perhaps officials are more tolerant there.

    They're not, of course, nor are secular progressives in America or radical Islamists everywhere. Neither believes in free speech, as progressives put clamps on expression wherever they can, especially in higher education, by forbidding outside speakers to lecture and by doubling down on trigger warnings, microaggressions, miniscule free speech zones, and "safe places" for suffering souls overcome with a case of the vapors after being exposed to a dissident thought. Meanwhile, Islamist punishments for blasphemy are unforgiving, brutal, and nefarious.

    Further, secular progressives and radical Islamists hold America in contempt, and they favor rule by an unaccountable elite – an administrative-bureaucratic class of experts, in the progressive case, a vision that has lurked in the progressive imagination since Teddy Roosevelt's days, while Muslims insist on obeisance to sharia enforced by religious overseers. Both aspire to totalitarian rule under dictatorships of those who are self-selected by political or religious criteria. These presiding masters are radically anti-modern and yearn to establish or recreate primeval societies based on apocalyptic rants of environmental cultists on the one hand and atavistic seventh-century radicals on the other. Both movements lie habitually, with the assurance that deception is justified by the needs of their religious-political movements, and with the assurance of never having to face the consequences of their words and actions. Finally, both are supported by very large segments of their societies.

    Of course, there are differences as well, several of which are important. For instance, radical Islamists view Western libertinism with abhorrence, do not tolerate homosexuality or feminism, and worship a higher being – all of which are anathema to secular progressive ideology. Indeed, in the long run, progressives could no more live under sharia than Islamists could celebrate the gay lifestyle. But this matters little in the short run, during which each side finds the other useful for combating a common foe – a constitutional democracy with Judeo-Christian roots. This means that secular progressives and Islamists will continue to work in concert, indefinitely, for all the reasons cited above. And in spite of isolated setbacks, they are winning.
    Perhaps not such a strange alliance, after all.

    Dr. Marvin Folkertsma is a retired professor of political science and fellow for American studies with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College. The author of several books, his latest release is a high-energy novel titled The Thirteenth Commandment.

    Read more:

    November 25, 2015

    Paris, ISIS, and the Externalization of Evil

    By Alex Alexiev

    Only a few days have passed since the terrorist bloodbath in Paris, but it is already clear that the conclusions France and the West have drawn from the carnage are not only wrong, but likely to guarantee more of the same. In short, they seem to believe that the terrorist acts of Nov. 13 were organized and carried out by ISIS and, therefore, destroying ISIS will prevent future terror and should become the priority. This is a dangerous delusion even if ISIS is proven to have been instrumental in the organization of the attacks, which is not the case to date. Destroying ISIS, as desirable as that is by itself, will do nothing to reverse the frightening radicalization that has taken place in the burgeoning Muslim communities in Western Europe and increasingly in the United States. A radicalization that promises more mayhem for years to come, yet one that Western authorities refuse to fess up to let alone take decisive measures against.

    That blaming ISIS is a classical case of the ‘externalization of evil’ psychological syndrome is not difficult to prove. Less than a year before the Paris events, in the Charlie Hebdo massacre, experts and pundits alike pointed to Al Qaeda and no one mentioned ISIS. Indeed, the audio claiming ISIS involvement was made by the French Islamist, Fabien Clain, who was sentenced to five years in jail in 2009 for recruiting jihadists for the Middle East at a time when nobody had heard of ISIS. It is a fact that virtually all of the conspirators identified so far, as well as the thousands who flocked to jihad in Syria and Iraq, were born, raised and radicalized in Europe before ISIS existed. This is the disturbing reality that Western leaders refuse to admit that will continue to exist regardless of whether ISIS does or does not.

    And a very troubling reality it is. There are currently 751 Muslim ghettoes in France officially if euphemistically designated as “sensitive urban zones” (ZUS) and another 1400 called “priority neighborhoods” (cartiers prioritaire). What they all have in common is high levels of criminality and dependence on welfare and, most importantly, the fact that they increasingly resemble parallel Muslim societies outside the writ of French law, or as many French call them “territories lost to the Republic.” Such enclaves now exist throughout Western Europe and are similarly radicalized. Three of the Paris murderers, for instance, lived in Molenbeek, the huge Brussels Muslim ghetto that, according to the public admission of Belgian minister of the interior, Jan Jambon, is no longer under the control of the government.

    How did it come to that and exactly how bad is it?

    To start with the latter, a 2004 study by the French ministry of education conducted in public schools near the Muslim ghettoes and known as the ‘Rapport Obin,’ painted the following picture: Muslim enforcers, known in the schools as “big brothers,” impose conformity with Islamist norms by physical violence and intimidation. Muslim girls must follow a strict dress code which prohibits makeup, skirts and dresses, and any co-educational activities, along with going to the gym, the swimming pool, or the theater. Students are further enjoined from studying Voltaire or reading Madam Bovary or taking geometry because they may accidentally draw the sign of the cross. English is to be avoided as the language of imperialism. Jewish students, the report admits, can no longer be guaranteed a proper education in these schools, because of rampant anti-Semitism. These practices, concluded the study, were transforming the schools into religious counter-societies with “norms on a collision course with those of modern, democratic society.”
    And the results of this collision course are not difficult to see today. Shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre last January, the French government deployed 7000 military to guard Jewish institutions and businesses from Islamist thugs, thereby admitting that the police in a major Western country are no longer capable of guaranteeing law and order.

    The answer to the question of how the Muslim diaspora communities in the West were radicalized is fairly straight forward. Beginning with the oil embargo in 1973, Saudi Arabia began receiving windfall profits from the skyrocketing prices of oil. By 1980, its oil income had grown nearly hundredfold compared to 1970. Flush with money, it started exporting its radical Wahhabi creed with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood and numerous Saudi-controlled Islamist organizations like the Muslim World League (MWL), the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), the Al Haramain Foundation and the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO). By its own admission, Riyadh had spent the colossal sum of $80 billion in promoting Wahhabism, and, as it turned out later, terrorism in the West by the year 2002. What this largesse accomplished was truly impressive. According to official Saudi sources, it had established 210 Islamic centers, 1500 mosques, 202 colleges, and 2000 Islamic schools, all dedicated to spreading the poisonous Wahhabi creed in the West.

    France was an early focus of the Saudis. As early as 1981, Riyadh provided money for the construction of 19 French mosques, according to the Muslim World League Journal of August 1981, followed by financing for “maintenance and renovation” of 300 mosques in March of 1982. By 1983, the Saudi/Muslim Brotherhood alliance had founded the Union of Islamic Organizations in France (UIOF), a radical Islamist organization comprising 200 Muslim associations, which continues to dominate French Islam to this day. Domestically, UIOF works closely with the Hamas financier, Palestinian Charitable and Relief Committee (CBSP) and the imam-training European Institute of Human Sciences (EIHS), while internationally it follows the writ of the radical European Council for Fatwa and Research (ECFR) led by the suicide-bombing endorsing Sheikh Yusuf al- Qaradawi.
    Given this legacy, it is hardly surprising that a 2014 opinion survey sponsored by Newsweek found that 16% of French Muslims approve of ISIS, a percentage that jumps to 27% in the age group 18 to 24years.

    Yet another complicating factor in the efforts of the French and other European authorities in confronting the radicals is the reality that Muslims in several Western European countries have reached critical electoral mass and can no longer be disregarded politically. This is especially the case with the European Left, which is the traditional beneficiary of the Muslim vote. In France, for instance, François Hollande won the presidential election by 1.2 million votes, but only because the roughly 2 million Muslim voters chose him over Sarakozy by a 93% margin. Undoubtedly aware of that, Hollande curried favor with the Muslims by promising them to change the constitution to allow non-citizens to vote in municipal elections.

    So what is to be done? The first thing to do is for the West to get rid of its wishful thinking that its systemic problem with radical Islam could somehow be solved with a deus-ex-machina like defeat of ISIS. Then we need to take a long, hard look at the sources of radicalization of Muslim communities in the West, both ideological and financial. At the very least, statutes must be introduced that prohibit foreign financing of Western Muslims, as Austria recently did. Prohibiting jihadist propaganda, as Germany did last year, should similarly be a matter of course. Though helpful, none of these measures are likely to help much, however, as long as we refuse to confront the ideology of Islamism head on, instead of appeasing it with facile mantras about Islam being a religion of peace. It is a hard fact that radical Islam as preached and practiced in Muslim communities worldwide today is a religion of murder and mayhem that cannot and should not be tolerated. At the bottom of this and a common denominator for all Islamists is sharia. Far from being God’s sacred law, as Islamists would have us believe, sharia is a post-Quranic, man-made doctrine designed to justify Arab imperialism a century and a half after Muhammad. It preaches violence, hate and discrimination against non-Muslims and women. It is not about religion but about sedition and, as such, has no place in civilized society.

    Alex Alexiev is a senior fellow in the International Assessment and Strategy Center (IASC) in Wash. D.C. He twits on national security at and could be reached at

    Read more:
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    March 9, 2015
    ISIS is the Syndrome, Sharia the Real Malignancy

    By Alex Alexiev
    As the US-led kinetic war against ISIS continues with indifferent success and less than certain prospects to date, answering the obvious question of what motivates that murderous organization becomes more pressing by the day. Remarkably, there have been no visible efforts in that direction by either the White House or the Defense Department. Indeed, the much touted Obama Administration-sponsored conference on 'countering violent extremism' further obfuscated the issue by its oxymoronic definition of terrorism as 'acts of violence' committed 'against people of different faiths, by people of different faiths.' Neither did the 'Team America' high-level Pentagon-sponsored recent meeting in Kuwait help much with its lapidary conclusion that the US strategy against ISIS is correct.

    Against that meager analytical background, a much discussed and praised effort to decipher ISIS ideology by journalist Graeme Wood in the March issue of the Atlantic Magazine deserves close scrutiny, because it is a good example of just how muddled and unrealistic our understanding of radical Islam with respect to ISIS has become.

    Titled 'What Does ISIS Really Want,' the article's main contribution is its common sense proposition that ISIS is Islamic, indeed, 'very Islamic.' Unfortunately, the rest of it is a largely failed effort to explain what drives ISIS to do what it does with a confused exegesis of its Islamic beliefs and interviews with several sympathizers. Key emphasis is given to its ostensible eschatological predilections as a 'key agent of the coming apocalypse' and a 'headline player in the imminent end of the world' when the messiah Mahdi will show up on Judgment Day. Mr. Wood also makes much of ISIS's reported faithfulness to something called the 'prophetic methodology of the caliphate' and implies strongly that what they practice is a 'distinctive variety' and a 'coherent and even learned interpretation of Islam,' which aims 'returning civilization to a seventh century legal environment.'
    Much of this makes little sense to anybody who's familiar with the foundational texts of Islam. It is true that the Quran does deal with Judgment Day in Sura 75 (Yawm al-Qiyamah), but much of what it says appears to be borrowed from the Bible and Mahdi, an essentially Shia concept, is not mentioned at all. 'Prophetic methodology' is a propaganda term used by ISIS and means nothing, especially in connection with the caliphate, which is not mentioned in either the Quran or the traditions (Sunna) of Muhammad. As far as the 'seventh century legal environment' is concerned, it's worth noting that during Muhammad's life time and that of his immediate successors, there was no Islamic corpus juris in existence and to the extent that a legal system existed at all, it was mostly the old Arab customary law (urf) and arbitration that were practiced. In fact, the codification of sharia as Islamic law did not begin until the middle of the 8th century and was not completed until the end of the 9th century, or 2nd and 3rd century of Islam.

    If ISIS ideology thus has little to do with 'prophetic methodology' and eschatological propaganda, it has everything to do with sharia. And the reason for that is very simple, for sharia is the most radical possible interpretation of Islam and a real source of legitimacy for those practicing it among the millions of Islamist sympathizers.

    So what exactly is sharia? To radical Islamists, salafis and jihadists of all kinds, sharia is 'God's sacred law' to be obeyed to the letter if a Muslim were to end up in heaven. More than that, it is also the constitution of the Islamic state and the guarantee of the perfect synergy between religion and the state (din wa dawla). To reform-minded Muslims and most non-Muslims it is nothing of the kind. Rather it is a post-Quranic, man-made doctrine designed to legitimate the imperialist policies of the hereditary Muslim empires that followed Muhammad and his successors and the open discrimination against non-Muslims and women widely practiced by them. Moreover, sharia was based for the most part not on the Quran, but on secondary and often unreliable sources such as the hadith (Muhammad's sayings).

    To the extent that sharia is based on the Quran, the cornerstone of its interpretation is the doctrine of abrogation (naskh), which invalidates most of the peaceful and tolerant verses of the earlier Meccan period and replaces them with the later violence-preaching Medinese verses. As a result, sharia is not only radical and intolerant, but is also in direct conflict with many Quranic injunctions. Thus, the punishment for apostasy is death in sharia, but 100 lashes in the Quran. The former makes the establishment of the caliphate and sharia a religious obligation for Muslims, while the latter does not mention either one of them at all. In the Quran, Muslims are enjoined to fight in self-defense, sharia makes offensive jihad for the spread of Islam mandatory among many other examples. If one were to characterize sharia today, which Muslims have been obligated to follow blindly (taqlid) since the 10th century, what comes readily to mind is the Catholic faith at the time of the inquisition.

    The discriminatory and violent nature of sharia's injunctions made it impractical as a law early on in Muslim states that were multi-national and multi-confessional, as most of them were, and though it was regularly paid lip service to, it was seldom practiced, except occasionally as family law. In the early Muslim empires, for instance, justice was administered mostly by courts of grievance (mazalim), police courts (shurta) or market judges (sahib al souk), rather than sharia, while in the historically greatest Muslim state of all, the Ottoman empire, the law of the land was kanun osmanly, an essentially secular law.
    In fact, sharia's political fortunes did not change for the better until the patron saints of contemporary radical Islam, Abul ala Mawdudi and Sayyid Qutb, elevated the imposition of sharia as the sole criterion of whether or not a state is Muslim or apostate in middle of the 20th century. Since then, with the help of huge amounts of Saudi money and the spread of Muslim Brotherhood networks, sharia has become the sine qua non of the radical Islamist idiom that currently dominates the Muslim establishment worldwide. It is simply a fact that from the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) on down to countless mosques, Islamic centers and Muslim organizations, no rule, regulation or bylaw is viewed as legitimate if it contradicts sharia.

    What the widespread support for sharia among Muslims means is that President Obama's repeatedly expressed belief that there is no radical Islam, but just individual terrorists, is widely off the mark. In just a couple of examples relevant to ISIS, a recent open letter signed by 126 prominent Muslims from around the world, including many US Islamists, denouncing ISIS' tactics, nonetheless endorses sharia. In another example, a radical Wahhabi preacher and passionate sharia supporter named Mohamed al-Arefe, approved of raping kidnapped Yazidi women in a tweet to his 10 million followers, while the prominent Islamist and member of the influential 'senior council of clerics' in Saudi Arabia, Saleh al-Fawzan, issued a fatwa arguing that whoever denies the legitimacy of slavery in sharia becomes an infidel.
    For jihadist organizations like ISIS, being sharia-compliant in a self-proclaimed caliphate bestows them huge legitimacy in the eyes of the devout. What we view as barbaric practices, including raping and enslaving 'infidel' women, crucifixions, killing homosexuals and Muslim apostates, are fully justified in sharia. Undoubtedly, the ISIS cutthroats believe that some of their more recent gruesome innovations, such as chopping off women's hands for using cell phones or beheading smokers, are also legitimate under sharia.

    Muslims are also obligated by sharia to emigrate to the caliphate, which helps explain the huge number of volunteer jihadists who continue to flock to ISIS. The ISIS' self-anointed 'Caliph Ibrahim' enjoys yet another political benefit under sharia, which orders Muslims to obey him even if he is 'unjust,' because 'a rebellion against a caliph is one of the greatest enormities.'
    What is beyond doubt is sharia's absolute incompatibility with basic human rights, democratic norms and the law of nations and its highly seditious nature in calling for violence against non-Muslims and non-conforming Muslims both. Until the community of nations and the Muslims themselves come to terms with this malignant doctrine and act to delegitimize it, its poisonous offshoots like ISIS will continue to thrive.

    Alex Alexiev is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center (IASC) in Wash. D.C. and chairman of the Center for Balkan and Black Sea Studies ( in Sofia, Bulgaria. His latest book on Islamism "The Wages of Extremism: Radical Islam's Threat to the West and the Muslim World," is available as a pdf file from the Hudson Institute.

    Read more:
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    Read more:
    Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2015

Share This Page