'cookieChoices = {};'


Justice
Not Married to Liberty
Is Totalitarianism

click.jpg

Friday, November 23, 2007

Islam: 270 Million Dead Bodies Can't Be Wrong


Front Page Magazine interviewes Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam (via Pedestrian Infidel):


FP: Tell us a bit about the Center for the Study of Political Islam.

Warner: The Center for the Study of Political Islam is a group of scholars who are devoted to the scientific study of the foundational texts of Islam—Koran, Sira (life of Mohammed) and Hadith (traditions of Mohammed). There are two areas to study in Islam, its doctrine and history, or as CSPI sees it—the theory and its results. We study the history to see the practical or experimental results of the doctrine.

CSPI seems to be the first group to use statistics to study the doctrine. Previous scientific studies of the Koran are primarily devoted to Arabic language studies.

Our first principle is that Koran, Sira and Hadith must be taken as a whole. We call them the Islamic Trilogy to emphasize the unity of the texts.

Our major intellectual breakthrough is to see that dualism is the foundation and key to understanding Islam. Everything about Islam comes in twos starting with its foundational declaration: (1) there is no god but Allah and (2) Mohammed is His prophet. Therefore, Islam is Allah (Koran) and the Sunna (words and deeds of Mohammed found in the Sira and Hadith).

Endless ink has been wasted on trying to answer the question of what is Islam? Is Islam the religion of peace? Or is the true Islam a radical ideology? Is a moderate Muslim the real Muslim?

This reminds a scientist of the old arguments about light. Is light a particle or is light a wave? The arguments went back and forth. Quantum mechanics gave us the answer. Light is dualistic; it is both a particle and a wave. It depends upon the circumstances as to which quality manifests. Islam functions in the same manner.

Our first clue about the dualism is in the Koran, which is actually two books, the Koran of Mecca (early) and the Koran of Medina (later). The insight into the logic of the Koran comes from the large numbers of contradictions in it. On the surface, Islam resolves these contradictions by resorting to “abrogation”. This means that the verse written later supersedes the earlier verse. But in fact, since the Koran is considered by Muslims to be the perfect word of Allah, both verses are sacred and true. The later verse is “better,” but the earlier verse cannot be wrong since Allah is perfect. This is the foundation of dualism. Both verses are “right.” Both sides of the contradiction are true in dualistic logic. The circumstances govern which verse is used.

For example:

(Koran of Mecca) 73:10: Listen to what they [unbelievers] say with patience, and leave them with dignity.

From tolerance we move to the ultimate intolerance, not even the Lord of the Universe can stand the unbelievers:

(Koran of Medina) 8:12: Then your Lord spoke to His angels and said, “I will be with you. Give strength to the believers. I will send terror into the unbelievers’ hearts, cut off their heads and even the tips of their fingers!”

All of Western logic is based upon the law of contradiction—if two things contradict, then at least one of them is false. But Islamic logic is dualistic; two things can contradict each other and both are true.

No dualistic system may be measured by one answer. This is the reason that the arguments about what constitutes the “real” Islam go on and on and are never resolved. A single right answer does not exist.

Dualistic systems can only be measured by statistics. It is futile to argue one side of the dualism is true. As an analogy, quantum mechanics always gives a statistical answer to all questions.

For an example of using statistics, look at the question: what is the real jihad, the jihad of inner, spiritual struggle or the jihad of war? Let’s turn to Bukhari (the Hadith) for the answer, as he repeatedly speaks of jihad. In Bukhari 97% of the jihad references are about war and 3% are about the inner struggle. So the statistical answer is that jihad is 97% war and 3% inner struggle. Is jihad war? Yes—97%. Is jihad inner struggle? Yes—3%. So if you are writing an article, you can make a case for either. But in truth, almost every argument about Islam can be answered by: all of the above. Both sides of the duality are right.

FP: Why, in your view, is there so much ignorance about the history and doctrine of political Islam in the West?

Warner: First, let’s see how ignorant we are about the history of political Islam. How many Christians can tell you how Turkey or Egypt became Islamic? What happened to the Seven Churches of Asia mentioned in Paul’s letters? Find a Jew who can tell you the Jewish history of dhimmitude (second class citizens who serve Islam). What European knows that white women were the highest priced slaves in Mecca? Everyone knows how many Jews Hitler killed, but
find an unbeliever who can tell you how many died in jihad over the last 1400 years.

FP: You mentioned earlier how logic is another point of profound difference. Can you touch on that?

Warner: To reiterate, all of science is based upon the law of contradiction. If two things contradict each other, then at least one of them has to be false. But inside of Islamic logic, two contradictory statements can both be true. Islam uses dualistic logic and we use unitary scientific logic.

Since Islam has a dualistic logic and dualistic ethics, it is completely foreign to us. Muslims think differently from us and feel differently from us. So our aversion is based upon fear and a rejection of Islamic ethics and logic. This aversion causes us to avoid learning about Islam so we are ignorant and stay ignorant.

Another part of the aversion is the realization that there is no compromise with dualistic ethics. There is no halfway place between unitary ethics and dualistic ethics. If you are in a business deal with someone who is a liar and a cheat, there is no way to avoid getting cheated. No matter how nice you are to a con man, he will take advantage of you. There is no compromise with dualistic ethics.
In short, Islamic politics, ethics and logic cannot be part of our civilization. Islam does not assimilate, it dominates. There is never any “getting along” with Islam. Its demands never cease and the demands must be met on Islam’s terms: submission.

The last reason for our aversion to the history of political Islam is our shame. Islam put over a million Europeans into slavery. Since Muslims can’t be enslaved, it was a white Christian who was the Turkish sultan’s sex slave. These are things that we do not want to face.

Jews don’t want to acknowledge the history of political Islam, because they were dhimmis, second class citizens or semi-slaves, just like the Christians. Jews like to recall how they were advisors and physicians to powerful Muslims, but no matter what the Jew did or what position he held, he was still a dhimmi. There is no compromise between being equal and being a dhimmi

Why should a Hindu want to recall the shame of slavery and the destruction of their temples and cities? After Hindu craftsmen built the Taj Mahal, the Muslim ruler had their right hands cut off so that they could not build anything as beautiful for anyone else. The practice of suttee, the widow throwing herself on the husband’s funeral pyre, came about as a response to the rape and brutality of the Islamic jihad as it sweep over ancient Hindustan.

Blacks don’t want to face the fact that it was a Muslim who rounded up their ancestors in Africa to wholesale to the white slave trader. The Arab is the true master of the African. Blacks can’t accept the common bond they share with whites: that both Europeans and Africans were slaves under Islam. Blacks like to imagine Islam is their counterweight to white power, not that Islam has ruled them for 1400 years.

Dualistic logic. Dualistic ethics. Fear. Shame. There is no compromise. These are the reasons we don’t want to know about Islam’s political history, doctrine or ethics.

FP So is there such a thing as non-political Islam?

Warner: Non-political Islam is religious Islam. Religious Islam is what a Muslim does to avoid Hell and go to Paradise. These are the Five Pillars—prayer, charity to Muslims, pilgrimage to Mecca, fasting and declaring Mohammed to be the final prophet.

Political Islam’s most famous duality is the division of the world into believers, dar al Islam, and unbelievers, dar al harb. The largest part of the Trilogy relates to treatment of the unbelievers, kafirs. Even Hell is political. There are 146 references to Hell in the Koran. Only 6% of those in Hell are there for moral failings—murder, theft, etc. The other 94% of the reasons for being in Hell are for the intellectual sin of disagreeing with Mohammed, a political crime. Hence, Islamic Hell is a political prison for those who speak against Islam.

Mohammed preached his religion for 13 years and garnered only 150 followers. But when he turned to politics and war, in 10 years time he became the first ruler of Arabia by averaging an event of violence every 7 weeks for 9 years. His success did not come as a religious leader, but as a political leader.

In short, political Islam defines how the unbelievers are to be dealt with and treated.

FP: Can you touch briefly on the history of political Islam?

Warner: The history of political Islam starts with Mohammed’s immigration to Medina. From that point on, Islam’s appeal to the world has always had the dualistic option of joining a glorious religion or being the subject of political pressure and violence. After the immigration to Medina, Islam became violent when persuasion failed. Jihad entered the world.

After Mohammed’s death, Abu Bakr, the second caliph, settled the theological arguments of those who wished to leave Islam with the political action of death by the sword. The jihad of Umar (the second caliph, a pope-king) exploded into the world of the unbelievers. Jihad destroyed a Christian Middle East and a Christian North Africa. Soon it was the fate of the Persian Zoroastrian and the Hindu to be the victims of jihad. The history of political Islam is the destruction of Christianity in the Middle East, Egypt, Turkey and North Africa. Half of Christianity was lost. Before Islam, North Africa was the southern part of Europe (part of the Roman Empire). Around 60 million Christians were slaughtered during the jihadic conquest.

Half of the glorious Hindu civilization was annihilated and 80 million Hindus killed.

The first Western Buddhists were the Greeks descended from Alexander the Great’s army in what is now Afghanistan. Jihad destroyed all of Buddhism along the silk route. About 10 million Buddhists died. The conquest of Buddhism is the practical result of pacifism.

Zoarasterianism was eliminated from Persia.

The Jews became permanent dhimmis throughout Islam.

In Africa over 120 million Christians and animists have died over the last 1400 years of jihad.

Approximately 270 million nonbelievers died over the last 1400 years for the glory of political Islam. These are the Tears of Jihad which are not taught in any school.

We hate ourselves because we are mentally molested and abused. Our intellectuals and artists have responded to the abuse of jihad just as a sexually abused child or a rape victim would respond. We are quite intellectually ill and are failing at our job of clear thinking. We can’t look at our denial.

Islam declares that we are the enemies of Allah. If we do not learn the political doctrine of Islam we will end up just like the first victims of Islam—the tolerant, polytheist Arabs of Saudi Arabia who became the Wahabbis (a very strict branch of Islam) of today, the most intolerant culture on the face of the earth.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link#

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good to see this article is receiving much needed attention. I've frequently linked to this article as it provides insight to the useful contradictions in Islamic doctrine.

There is a statement above, frequently found at LGF, JW and DW, that I have yet to see fully referenced:

"Political Islam’s most famous duality is the division of the world into believers, dar al Islam, and unbelievers, dar al harb."

This statement is implied in the various verses, but I have yet to find it stated as above.

Friday, November 23, 2007 3:23:00 pm  
Blogger Pastorius said...

Hi Anonymous,

I,also, recall having trouble finding verses which directly define this division.

Here's some info for you:

18) The world is divided between Dar-al-Islam and Dar-al-Harb (the domain of war, the Kufr lands). Muslims living in Dar-al-Harb must work to disrupt their host nations until these can be brought into Dar-al-Islam.

Dar al Harb and the Umma:

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/hatredinislam.shtml
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=2601 http://www.ucg.org/commentary/madridbombings.htm


8) Regards all unbelievers (Kaffirs, Kuffar, Kufrs, Kafirs) as ritually unclean subhumans to be killed, subjugated, enslaved, exploited or parasitised. Kafirs are described by the Arabic word 'najis' - literally 'filth'. That's why Muslim hatred of Kafirs is intrinsic to their 'religion'. A Kafir doesn't need to DO anything to offend a Muslim, his very existence is enough of an affront.

Najis kafirs:
http://www.al-islam.org/laws/najisthings.html
Cartoon Nazi article
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/006589.php

Treatment of kafirs:
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/kafir.html

Enslavement of kaffirs:
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/slavery.htm
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/7016
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/neitherblacknorafrican.shtml


9) The ethical system applies only to Muslims. Allah encourages rape, pillage, extortion and enslavement of non-Muslims. Morality does not extend beyond the global gang (ummah). Muslim ethics are the ethics of the Mafia.

Loyalty to the Umma first (Ummafia)

Sixth Column article
http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003123.html

Massacre, rape, pillage and enslavement:
Hindu Unity Article
Berean article

14) Lying and deception of infidels (taqiyya) is encouraged. This may take many forms, including outright lies, feigned moderation, and condemnation of terrorist attacks to the Kaffir while rejoicing with fellow Muslims. Muslims often tend to regard themselves as victims of some group of Kafirs so they can harbor grudges against them and against Kafirs in general.

Individuals may appear law-abiding and reasonable, but they are part of a totalitarian movement, and must be considered potential killers who can flip in an instant (SJS -'Sudden Jihad Syndrome').

Taqiyya:
http://www.freeman.org/m_online/dec97/phares.htm
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/nikah.shtml
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/3518
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=178
http://hauns.com/~DCQu4E5g/koran5.html
http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/Feature%20articles/02-12-2002.asp,

Muslim victimology
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/Islamic_victimization.htm
http://www.iranian.com/Opinion/2002/March/Victim/index.html
Real Clear Politics article

Sudden Jihad Syndrome
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21630
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SJS
Lost Budgie article
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/011114.php

15) Muslims are forbidden to befriend Kaffirs except for purposes of deceit or where conversion may be possible.

http://www.islamreview.com/articles/whoareinfidels.shtml
http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/25283

17) Treaties and agreements with Kaffirs are made to be broken (Hudna). The word of a Muslim to a Kafir counts for nothing in the eyes of Allah. Allah is The Father Of Lies.

Hudna:
http://jihadwatch.org/archives/004085.php
http://www.middleeastinfo.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=8365

Friday, November 23, 2007 3:42:00 pm  
Blogger Citizen Warrior said...

Pastorius: That was a great article. Very informative. This company that translates books are the people who published my favorite version of the Koran, called A Simple Koran. Not only do they make the Koran readable, but they put it in the order it was written, which makes it very clear how the revelations changed as Muhammad gained political power.

Another reason westerners don't know much about Islam is that the book is hard to read because it is so repetitive and negative. But it is worth struggling through it just to know what's in there. I think this same company publishes a version of the Koran with all the repetition removed. That might be a better way to go.

Still another reason westerners don't know about Islam is because now the subject is scary. It frightens people when you tell them what's in 1.5 billion peoples' holy book. They want to change the subject as quickly as possible and don't want to think about what that means for the future.

I think it is important for us who have gotten over our heeby-jeebies to make it as easy for others to absorb the information as possible. Try not to scare them. We all need to know this stuff. Sooner is better than later.

Tuesday, November 27, 2007 2:23:00 am  
Blogger René O'Deay said...

Update this, to appear at the top again. Surely needs to be seen now.

Appreciate the way Walker lays this complex ideology out. and the comments.

Do you ever get over the heeby-jeebies?

Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:29:00 am  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home


Older Posts Newer Posts