REMEMBER THE MUSLIM SAUDIS INVASION OF AMERICA SEPT 11
Fear Of Muslims Is Rational; “Islamophobia” Is A Myth
Merriam-Webster’s dictionary describes the word “phobia” as “an exaggerated, usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation.” In the wake of recent events, is fear of Muslims, labeled “Islamophobia,” really exaggerated, inexplicable, and/or illogical?
I’ve concluded that not only is fear of Muslims logical and explicable, but it is by no means exaggerated and, most probably, understated. The deliberately misleading term “Islamophobia” itself amounts to a cudgel used to silence critics of what Dutch Parliamentarian (and possible new Dutch Prime Minister) Geert Wilders has at times characterized as a totalitarian political ideology masquerading as a religion.
I could enumerate just some in the endless litany of recent (and even not-so-recent) violent attacks that radical Muslims have perpetrated in (delusional) Western societies that welcomed and unsuccessfully attempted to absorb and assimilate large numbers of Muslims. However, Raymond Ibrahim has already done so, writing extensively (and magnificently) about historical events that provide countless examples (here and here) of aggressive Muslim behaviors resulting in widespread slaughter. His writings elucidate numerous historical episodes consuming people of all ethnicities and religions, including their fellow Muslims, with particular cruelty reserved for Africans, Armenians, and, of course, Jews.
Image: Salman Rushdie (edited), a “lucky” victim of Muslim violence, for he survived the deadly attack against him. YouTube screen grab.
Why has
- Geert Wilders been (in his own words) “deprived of a personal life” requiring constant police protection for more than a decade?
- Salman Rushdie had to spend the last 35 years in fear? (And note that his fear was justified.)
- Hoover Institute fellow Ayaan Hirsi Ali, now a Christian, who was both abused and mutilated by “Imams” as a child, been living “with round-the-clock security due to her willingness to speak out and her abandonment of the Muslim faith?
If Islam is peaceful, why do these prominent critics need constant protection?
If we look around the world, Muslims are fighting in many places:
- Muslim insurgencies are found in the Philippines and Thailand.
- Numerous Indo (India)-Pakistani Wars have pitted Muslim Pakistan against majority Hindu India, while India’s Muslims regularly launch religious attacks.
- Muslim Chechens fight Russian Orthodox Christians and send death squads into Europe.
- Muslim Azeris fight those Armenians who remain from the genocide the Muslim Turks perpetrated against them in 1916.
- Historical animosity between Turks and Greeks is well documented and continues to this day in Cyprus, split between the Turkish North and Greek South.
- Orthodox Christian Serb and Muslim hostility dates back 600+ years to the Ottoman Wars.
- And we have the ongoing Arab/Israeli wars as the most glaring current-day example, during which a fictitious Muslim ethnic group, the “Palestinians” (really, Arabs), perfect modern-day terrorism.
- Muslim Arab Janjaweed regularly slaughter black Africans in Sudan.
Even the incomparable “Islamophobes” in China, who view any religion as a threat, place particular focus on Islam, which could be why the government maintains a system of “re-education camps” for Uyghurs, containing (for the time being) any potential for Muslim violence.
There also are examples of persistent internecine warfare between Muslims themselves:
Hamas displaced the PLO in Gaza in 2007, fighting door to door. Ironically, few were concerned about civilian casualties then, as Muslims slaughtered each other with impunity.
The Syrian Civil War, pitting Alawite against Sunni, resulted in upward of a half million slaughtered, displacing more than 6 million people and creating the largest refugee crisis since WWII, perhaps forever changing the character of the European continent and society. It also led to the rise of ISIS, whose members cruelly tortured and killed thousands of “impure” Muslims and other ethnicities, most famously Yazidis, until eliminated by US forces under President Trump’s leadership.
The mostly Shia Houthis displaced the hapless Sunni leadership in Yemen following a decade of proxy civil war during which tens of thousands died.
If we go back to the 1980s, more than a million were killed in the Iran-Iraq War, after which, two years later, in a duplicitous show of gratitude for financial support, Saddam invaded his Muslim-Arab financiers in Kuwait to avoid repayment of Iraq’s accumulated war debt.
Muslim societies themselves lean heavily toward despotism, demanding ideological purity and groupthink through a culture that requires submission. Indeed, a Muslim is “one who submits.” All who live in Muslim society live in constant fear of violence from the government and their fellow citizens.
Note that refugees from Syria insisted on going to Europe, particularly Germany, not to another Muslim country where they might have been familiar with the customs. Why is that? No reasonable person believes that Algerians, Gazans, Iranians, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, or Yemenis live carefree, unencumbered existences. African Haratine people in Mauritania remain enslaved by (of course) Muslim Arabs.
Facts show that Islam’s religio-political ideology and its adherents are anything but peaceful. Islam’s holy texts themselves incite violence, manifested against both non-believers and believers.
Islam’s teachings drive some Muslims to commit and condone evil. Muslims mutilate the genitalia of their subjugated women, whom they treat as children or second-class citizens. Family honor is tied to the sexual behavior of women, and honor killings often blame women, the victims, for being in situations they are unable to avoid or control.
Whenever women live under Muslim control, they exist in fear due to the primitive, dysfunctional “customs” enforced by a violent, patriarchal society that punishes differing opinions and free thought. Men, separated from women without the possibility for intimacy, turn to molesting young boys, a vile, hypocritical contradiction of their “faith”, which purports to prohibit homosexuality.
Considering its 1,500-year history of brutal, ruthless violence in pursuit of domination, it is logical for anybody to be afraid of Muslims and Islam. Fear of Islam is not, therefore, an exaggerated, inexplicable, or illogical fear. It is a reasonable, measured, and logical response to the repeated, ongoing violence that Muslims worldwide have committed for centuries. Winston Churchill, unencumbered by political correctness, said about Islam, “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith.”
Churchill, Rushdie, and Wilders all “told it like it is.” Islamophobia is a canard. This is all TRUE. If Muslims do not like hearing this then they must change their behaviors.
Lt. Colonel Jeff Cooper, the father of modern handgun safety, advised: “Observe your cat. He moves well, using his senses fully. He is not preoccupied with irrelevancies. He’s not thinking about his job or his image or his income tax. He is putting first things first, principally his physical security. Do likewise.” This teaches us two things: (1) Be aware of your surroundings and take precautions to stay safe and, perhaps more importantly, (2) Don’t worry about your image.
Americans, however, refuse to act like cats. They live in fear because many have abandoned truth. This is why useful idiots can repeat nonsense such as “Islam is a religion of peace” while the USA has been fighting Muslims for 30 years.
Christ taught the world that “the truth will set you free.” We must re-embrace Judeo-Christian values and stop worrying about our “image” or having woke mobs rebuke us for speaking the truth they consider “politically incorrect.” This self-censorship erodes truth.
Cowards lie due to weakness. Psalm 34 tells us to “keep your tongue from evil and your lips from telling lies.” Liars understand what awaits them at the gates of heaven.
Be courageous. Courage is needed in Joe Biden’s America, where nobody is punished for lying but only for telling the truth, which perpetuates deceit. We must flip the script and reacclimate society to truth, which will be difficult, especially for the “snowflakes.”
We must stop deceiving ourselves. We’ve been propagandized by academia and the media to self-censor, to believe that the truth (about everyone except Jews, apparently) is somehow offensive. It’s not. It’s reality. If something is true, say it loudly and repeatedly. While there are individual Muslims who are peaceful, Islam is not a “religion of peace,” and fear of Muslims is rational because of Islam’s violent history, medieval culture, and totalitarian tendencies. It is a ferocious political ideology masquerading as a religion. Don’t allow these tyrants, their useful idiots, nor their apologists to silence you any longer.
Jonathan Gault is a pseudonym.
Hamas Calls for Violence Against Americans — and So Does This Michigan Imam
Could the war in Israel spread to the United States?
[Make sure to read Robert Spencer’s contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]
Could the war in Israel spread to the United States? Sure. Some people want it to.
Hamas has never made a secret of the fact that its goal of destroying Israel is just part of a larger jihad to conquer the entire world for Islam. And so it was inevitable, both in light of that aspiration and the Biden regime’s shaky but still subsisting support for Israel’s defensive effort, that Hamas jihadis would call for violence against Americans. What is more surprising, at least for those who have bought into the comforting establishment fictions that have been circulating since 9/11, is that one such call came from right here at home.
Hamas operative Sami Abu Zuhri recently proclaimed that Biden regime Secretary of State Antony Blinken, despite pressuring Israel to go easy on the warriors of jihad, was just as bad as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “When Blinken is justifying the killing of women and children, the sons of our nation should say to him: You are the enemy, just like Netanyahu, and you must pay the price, just like Netanyahu. We should keep this in mind.” Yes, we should indeed.
If you’re wondering when exactly Blinken justified the killing of women and children, the answer, of course, is never. Blinken has actually parroted Hamas propaganda in warning Israel that it must do more to reduce civilian deaths, when in reality the number of civilians killed in Gaza compares favorably to the death toll of civilians in other recent conflicts, notably the battle of Mosul against ISIS in Iraq.
Nevertheless, Abu Zuhri wants to see American blood: “Now it is our nation’s turn to pressure the Americans to stop this war. We need violent acts against American and British interests everywhere, as well as the interests of all the countries that support the occupation.”
It’s hard to see how those who call for violence against people who have nothing to do with the conflict have the moral high ground, and those who are doing all they can to limit civilian casualties deserve the opprobrium of the entire world; we’d need an American university student to explain that.
Meanwhile, an echo of this call for jihad terror attacks against Americans came from a Muslim cleric, Ahmad Musa Jibril. Jibril, “whose hate-filled sermons,” according to a Friday report in the New York Post, “were said to have inspired the London Bridge terrorist attack,” is not in Britain, or in Baghdad or Balochistan. Jibril was born in Dearborn, Michigan, and while his current whereabouts are murky, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) identifies him as a “Michigan Islamic scholar,” and the Twitter/X account that posted his call for jihad in America states that it is operating out of Chicago and is “managed by students.” Jibril, who did hard time in the Terre Haute Federal Correctional Complex for fraud, money laundering, unlawful possession of firearms and more, clearly has considerable influence among Muslims in the United States.
Contradicting the false narrative Americans have been fed for two decades now, Jibril declared: “Yes, there is holy war in Islam, it is jihad. This may be a surprise to many who grew up in the West, especially those who were born or grew up post 9/11, because of the growing number of hypocrites, who are spreading the American-Zionist Islam, and it has nothing to do with Islam, that version of Islam is and Islam that suits the enemies.” He added that “the one who has been spreading that there is no holy war in Islam, has been defecating heresy out of his mouth for the past 20 years, downplaying the legislation of Allah and the Islamic punishments.”
That would include virtually all of the prominent Islamic spokesmen in the U.S. As far as Jibril is concerned, the only people who had it right about jihad and Islam were the ones who were (and still are) vilified, marginalized, and silenced as “Islamophobes.” And now he wants Muslims in the U.S. to start taking this holy war seriously: “The Muslims in the West, especially the youth in the West, especially the youth in America, need to wake up. The current events are a wake-up call for Muslims to start normalizing mentioning jihad’s proper meaning, and putting it back into their vocabulary. Jihad must be a common, normal term on your tongues, on your social media, and in the mosques and elsewhere.
This should, he said, be a matter of lifelong indoctrination: “It’s time the mothers nurse their infants with the love of jihad and the ambition to become a mujahid and a martyr.” A martyr in the Islamic sense is one who acts upon Allah’s promise of paradise in the Qur’an to those who “kill and are killed.” America said Jibril, is “a vicious enemy of Muslims.” And so the import of his words was clear: Muslims need to wage jihad against America. While the Biden regime’s FBI hunts for “white supremacist terrorists” and Jan. 6 “insurrectionists,” some young men in America right now are heeding the words of Ahmed Musa Jibril.
Robert Spencer
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 26 books including many bestsellers, such as The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades), The Truth About Muhammad and The History of Jihad. His latest books are The Critical Qur’an and The Sumter Gambit. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.
Reader Interactions
Kamala’s Jihad
Why Kamala is siding with Islamists over Israel.
[Make sure to read Daniel Greenfield’s contributions in Jamie Glazov’s new book: Barack Obama’s True Legacy: How He Transformed America.]
In December 2015, after a husband and wife pair of Islamic terrorists shot up a Christmas party in San Bernardino, Kamala Harris, then the Attorney General of California, convened a session on “Islamophobia” that included the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Muslim Student Association: all of which had defended Islamic terrorists.
With 130 dead in France and 13 murdered in her own state, Kamala gathered a group that included Islamic terror supporters to argue that even after “the recent attacks in Paris and San Bernardino”, it was wrong “to stoke fear and cast aspersions against an entire faith and the millions of law-abiding American Muslims”.
After the Islamic mass murders of over 1,000 Israelis, Kamala returned to pushing “Islamophobia”. In the speech that he delivered three days after the massacres, she urged Biden to include a line about “Islamophobia” because of the way that Muslims had supposedly ‘suffered’ from it after the Islamic terrorist attacks killed thousands on September 11.
Next month in November, she unveiled a push to fight “Islamophobia”, not antisemitism. It was Kamala who pressed Biden to be more open to Islamist groups and their complaints, driving him to profusely apologize for questioning the civilian casualty numbers coming out of Hamas.
And it was she who voiced the highest level criticisms of Israel’s war on Hamas.
In Dubai, Kamala claimed that, “too many innocent Palestinians have been killed. Frankly, the scale of civilian suffering and the images and videos coming from Gaza are devastating.”
This was the rhetoric that Biden would shortly adopt.
In her Dubai speech, Kamala set limits on what Israel could do. There would be no permanent return of Israeli forces to Gaza and no “siege or blockade”. Instead, Gaza would be reconstructed and the terrorist forces of the Palestinian Authority strengthened to take it over.
Kamala’s hostility came as a surprise to some Jewish Democrats who had been sold on the idea of her as an AIPAC supporter and who had mostly seen pictures of her with her Jewish husband, Douglas Emhoff, who has taken the lead in holding conversations about antisemitism.
But whatever Emhoff’s beliefs are, he does not make policy anymore than Jill Biden did under Obama. It’s his wife who actually does make policy and whose biases are becoming clearer.
Kamala has a history of enabling ugly views by Islamic terrorist supporters against Israel.
In 2021, Kamala nodded along at George Mason University as a student ranted that funding for Israel’s anti-missile defense system, the Iron Dome, “hurts my heart because it’s an ethnic genocide”. Then the vice president responded with, “your voice, your perspective, your experience, your truth, should not be suppressed.”
After Rep. Ilhan Omar’s antisemitic “benjamins” comment, Kamala, then a senator, defended Omar, touting the threat of “Islamophobia” and expressing concern that “the spotlight being put on Congresswoman Omar may put her at risk.”
Kamala went on to say that, “there is a difference between criticism of policy or political leaders, and anti-Semitism.”
Most people tended to ignore these remarks because Kamala had a history of inept and clumsy responses, but her reaction to the Hamas attacks shows that they were not accidental.
Since the Oct 7 Hamas atrocities, Kamala has expressed sympathy for Israel, but has also become the administration’s highest profile internal critic, pressuring Biden to be less pro-Israel. A Politico report described how “a person close to the vice president’s office said she believes the United States should be ‘tougher’ on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”
The problem with Kamala is the same one that manifested after the San Bernardino Christmas Party massacre. Kamala is close to Islamist groups and leftists and sympathetic to their views.
Those views are hostile to Israel and to America, and supportive of Islamic terrorism.
During her time in the California political establishment, Kamala developed a relationship with CAIR and MPAC. And through her sister, Maya Harris, formerly of the ACLU, she may have developed further connections with other leftist and Islamist activists. While Kamala does not have the same Islamic family background as Obama, like him she has closer ties to people from the Muslim world. And, much like Obama, her sympathy leans more toward Islam than Israel.
Like Obama, Kamala tends to speak of Jews in terms of sitcom stereotypes and cliches. She mimics meeting her future mother-in-law in a routine that could have come from SNL’s ‘Verklempt’ sketch, but she has no meaningful connections beyond her marriage to a man whose own daughter raises money for Gaza and identifies as not being Jewish.
Kamala claims that she has a Muslim friend who lost someone in Gaza, but no mention of any Jewish friends who did. After Islamic terrorist attacks, whether in California, France or Israel, Kamala worries more about “Islamophobia” toward Muslims than the suffering of their victims.
In July 2016, Kamala appeared at a Ramadan event at the Islamic Center of Southern California, which spun off the previously mentioned Muslim Public Affairs Council, and whose founders had expressed support for Islamic terrorism, to denounce “Islamophobia”.
A month earlier, an Islamic terrorist had killed 49 people at a nightclub in Florida. Kamala, who was running for the Senate, mentioned this attack among others, including those in San Bernardino and Paris, and blamed them on “mental illness and violent extremism”.
And she claimed that Muslims were suffering from a rash of “Islamophobia” caused by hate.
Kamala’s criticism of Israel for defending itself against Islamic terrorism is just a repetition of the rhetoric that her not especially long political career has trained her to deploy after terror attacks. It doesn’t matter whether the attacks are in America, Israel or anywhere else in the world, instead of siding with the victims, she will claim that the real problem is “Islamophobia”.
While Doug Emhoff reassures the Jews, his wife empathizes with their killers.
Daniel Greenfield
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
No comments:
Post a Comment