The Religion of Peace: Another Big Lie
By Jim ONeill
CanadaFreePress.com
“Ever since the religion of
Islam appeared in the world, the espousers of
it…have been as wolves and tigers to all other
nations, rending and tearing all that fell into
their merciless paws, and grinding them with their
iron teeth…. Such was, and is at this day, the rage,
the fury, the revenge, of these destroyers of human
kind.”—John Wesley (1703-1791) Methodist
leader
“While the merciless and
dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish
motives to human action, there can never be peace
upon earth, and good will towards men.”—John
Quincy Adams (1767-1848) Sixth President of the
United States
“Qur’an… an accursed book…
So long as there is this book there will be no peace
in the world.”—William Gladstone (1809-1898)
Prime Minister of Great Britain 1868-1894
There are such “social
values” today in Europe, America and Australia only
because during those thousand years, the Christians
of Europe possessed the warlike power to do what the
Christians of Asia and Africa had failed to do—that
is, to beat back the Moslem [sic] invader.—Teddy
Roosevelt (1858 -1919) Twenty-sixth President of
the United States
Moslems [sic] may show
splendid qualities—but the influence of the religion
paralyzes the social development of those who follow
it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the
world.”—Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
British Prime Minister
“Not all Muslims are
terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslims…. I
view Islam not as a religion, but as a dangerous,
totalitarian ideology—equal to communism and
fascism.”—Geert Wilders Dutch politician,
freedom fighter (has needed 24/7 protection for
several years due to death threats by Muslims)
First let me say that my prayers and condolences
go out to those killed or wounded in the recent
Muslim terrorist attacks in Paris, and to their
families and friends as well. Esprits de lumière
et la véritévous guider.
The terrorist attacks in Paris on November 13,
2015 give us what is called “a teachable moment.”
That is, an opportunity to elucidate, clarify,
strengthen and deepen our understanding of something
(in this case radical Islam) with minds that are (at
least temporarily) more open to new ideas than is
the norm.
I started seriously studying Islam about six
years ago, and I would like to share with readers
some of what I found. But first I would like to
discuss a bit of my personal backstory.
In the late 1960s and early
‘70s, I was a big fan of philosopher/teacher/author
Alan Watts. I read all his books, and also books
that he gave favorable reviews to. One such book was
“The Book of Strangers” by Ian Dallas (still being
published by
SUNY Press). I stumbled upon the book at a store
in 1973; read the favorable blurb by Watts on the
book’s cover (“He [Dallas] has…given a vision of God
that, instead of summoning with duty, allures with
delight”), and purchased the book.
I won’t describe “The Book
of Strangers,” other than to say that I found its
description of Islam very attractive. Around that
time I also read several books on Sufism by
Idries Shah, whose books were quite popular
then. Without misrepresenting it too badly, Sufism
may be described as a collection of
mystical/spiritual teachings whose taproot is Islam.
In 1975, I attended a satsang/darshan
(group/individual meeting, spiritual in nature) with
a group of fellow devotees and
Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan, head of a Sufi order
started by his father,
Hazrat Inayat Khan. The meeting was held at the
then newly opened “Abode
of the Message” in upstate New York. After the
meeting, Pir initiated me into the “Chisti Order of
the West” (renamed
Sufi Order
International (SOF) some years ago, it is
currently led by Pir Vilayat’s son,
Pir Zia Inayat
Khan.
It is worth noting that Pir
Vilayat served as an officer in the British Royal
Navy during WW II, and his sister,
Noor Inayat Khan, was (in the words of the BBC)
”the first female radio operator sent into
Nazi-occupied France by the Special Operations
Executive (SOE). She was arrested and eventually
executed by the Gestapo.”
I mention all this in order
to illustrate that when I first started to research
Islam in greater depth a few years back, I brought
with me a sympathetic attitude and a tendency to
give Islam the benefit of the doubt when debatable
questions arose. Although I have been for some years
a practicing Christian (nondenominational), I retain
a great fondness and respect for Sufism, at least as
taught by Inayat, Vilayat, and Zia Khan (and certain
others, such as
Rumi and
Hafiz), and, as I implied earlier, since reading
“The Book of Strangers”, I had seen Islam in a
favorable light.
So I was more than a little surprised and
dismayed at the unflattering portrait of Islam that
emerged as I delved into its history with an open
mind and clear eyes.
Uninterrupted Islamic aggression
Perhaps the first thing to
make me sit up and pay attention was the sheer
number of aggressive invasions instigated by
Muslims, century upon century.
This essentially
uninterrupted Islamic aggression (which granted,
ebbs and flows) has been largely hidden due
to the fact that the Muslims responsible are often
referred to by non-Islamic sounding euphemisms. For
example, the “Barbary
Pirates” that the United States fought its first
war against were Muslims (in a very
roundabout way I suppose Obama was correct when he
claimed that “Islam
has been woven into the fabric of our country since
its founding”).
The word “Turk” and it
variations is another euphemism for Muslims—as in
“The
Turks killed a million-and-a-half Armenians in 1915”
(which could be rewritten as “Muslims
killed a million-and-a-half Christians in 1915”).
“Ottoman” is sometimes used in place of “Turkish” (a
stand-in for a euphemism), as in “The
Ottoman Empire
besieged Vienna in 1683,” or “The
killing of the martyrs by Ottoman troops, who
launched a weeks-long siege of Otranto, a small port
town [in] southern Italy, took place in 1480.”
There’s the
“Turkish” slaughter of 5,000 of the Bulgarian
town of Batak’s 7,000 residents in 1876—and the list
goes on, and on.
Another favorite euphemism
is “Saracen,” as in “Saracen
pirates were defeated by Italian forces during
the ‘Battle of Ostia’ 849AD”—“Saracen” of course
means Muslim. Around that same time
“Saracen” invaders sacked the churches of St. Peter
and St. Paul outside the city walls of Rome
(846AD).
“Moor” is another
euphemism—for example “Charles
the Hammer (Martel) and his Frankish (French)
army defeated the Moors at the ‘Battle of Tours’
after the Moors invaded France in 732AD.” Or in
other words, Martel kicked Muslims out of France.
Then there’s Tamerlane (Timur)
and
the countless people he slaughtered in the name of
Allah. There’s the “Arabian” slave trade that
riddled and rotted the
African continent for centuries (not to mention
the millions of
European and
Slavic slaves captured by “Turks” and “Saracen
pirates”).
1.5 million Europeans and
Americans were enslaved in Islamic North Africa
”How
many know that perhaps 1.5 million Europeans and
Americans were enslaved in Islamic North Africa
between 1530 and 1780?”
Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011) “Jefferson
Versus the Muslim Pirates”
And oh, let’s see, there’s
the centuries-long
genocide of Hindus (the latest “incident”
occurred at
Mumbai, India in 2011).
”The Muslim
conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the
Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire
cities were burnt down and the populations
massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in
every campaign, and similar numbers deported as
slaves. Every new foreigner made (often literally)
his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of
Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the
annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is
still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter.”
Dr.
Koenraad Elst “Negation in India”
Eradication of the Nestorian
Christian Empire
There’s the total eradication of the Nestorian
Christian Empire that once ran from the
Mediterranean Sea to China. A Nestorian Christian
priest from China (named Bar Sauma) once traveled to
Rome where he was given communion by the Pope
(Nicholas IV), said mass, and in turn served
communion to the King of England (Edward I—see “Timothy
of Baghdad’s Lost Christian Empire”).
The longstanding and
ongoing
murder of Indonesian Buddhists and Christians by
Muslims makes for some eye-opening reading—at least
it did for me. Then there are the
Muslim rebels in the Philippines (whom
the US has some history with—ongoing history I
suspect). And there’s…well, you get the idea by now,
or don’t as the case may be. In any event that’s
enough of that.
I would like to discuss one more euphemism for
Muslims though—I’m speaking of the ubiquitous
all-purpose word “terrorist.” You know, as in “Terrorist
Tries to Blow Up Plane,” or “Why
would Terrorists Kill Cartoonists” (“Gunman” is
also good, as in “Gunman
kills 12, Wounds 31.” “Bomber” works well too—“Boston
Bomber Apologizes”). “Terrorist” is the king
euphemism though—it describes everything and
explains nothing. Why do these terrorists
rape,
murder,
torture and
maim? Apparently it’s simply because that’s what
terrorists do isn’t it, they’re terrorists.
And all these “lone wolf” terrorists have nothing
in common with each other outside of their penchant
for killing people—or so we are told, over and over
again.
Rather than go into more detail about what I
uncovered about Islam during my research, I will
stop here as I believe that I have provided enough
information to open eyes that may have been shut.
Those readers who refuse to open their eyes, or
already have them open, will or will not continue
researching Islam on their own.
So what’s going on here—why does Islam seem to
periodically morph into a bloodthirsty intolerant
monster from time to time, place to place? The
simplest response is that the answer lies in the
Quran itself, Islam’s holy book—that and certain
historical teachings based on the Quran.
I do not mean that the
Quran is an evil book, but when a certain type
of Muslim cherry-picks particular passages from the
Quran, Hadiths, and other Islamic teachings they
can, and do, come up with a vile, poisonous,
intolerant, hateful and hate-filled
homicidal/suicidal perversion of Islam.
How to separate the wheat from the chaff,
moderate Muslims from radical ones, is one tough nut
to crack, because both Sufi saints and murderous
zealots read from the same book. The difference is
in which passages they focus on and emphasize in
their hearts and minds.
In a way the situation is akin to the “old Indian
tale” about the two wolves in your heart—one of love
and one of hate—ever in conflict. Which wolf wins
depends on which one you feed.
We know which one the
radical Muslim terrorists feed, and you cannot,
simply cannot reason with such hate filled
zealots. There has historically only been one way to
deal with such insane depravity, and I believe you
know what it is.
If TSHTF time ever comes, I feel for the “good”
Muslims, the ones not bent on violent jihad. Some
few of them have been undeniably courageous in
standing up to radical Muslims—but, at least up to
this point, there appears to be too few of them to
make much of an impact. I say I feel for them
because if sufficient American blood is spilled on
American soil a “kill ‘em all and let God sort it
out” mentality will prevail in all probability, and
the question of separating good Muslims from bad
Muslims will drop by the wayside and become
immaterial.
That is not in any way to
be construed as a threat. It simply stems from the
fact that I’ve been around awhile, and have
considerable experience with human nature—and
fearful people can quickly become angry people. And
very fearful people more often than
not become very angry people.
There’s one last major
point I want to hit on as I wrap things up. Why have
“we the people” been lied to for so long by the
press, media, and others about the dangers posed by
radical Islam? There are several answers to that
question (including the billions spent by Muslim
countries to promote Islam in
kafir nations), but the one I will focus
on ties in with my last article, “Right
Wing Nazis: The Big Lie.”
Attentive readers might recall
that I pointed out that fascism (and hence its
offshoot Nazism) was, is, and always will be a Big
Government (i.e. LEFT wing) ideology. Islam, by the
by, is LEFT wing also.
By its very nature a theocratic (in this case
Islamic) government will tend toward
totalitarianism, that is, tend to the extreme
political left.
The French Revolution’s “Reign of
Terror,” Stalin’s gulags, Hitler’s concentration
camps, Pol Pot’s “Killing Fields,” ISIS’s cages…do
you sense a pattern there?
One of the reasons, perhaps
ultimately the main reason, the press, media,
politicians (Democrats especially), and others have
been covering up for radical Muslims is because the
majority of them are all in bed together.
Communists, fascists, NWO globalists, and Muslims
are all LEFT wing, and you had better believe that
Left wing communist/fascist extremists and radical
Muslims are tight. Odd bed-fellows, no doubt, but
they are united in their hatred of freedom, Western
civilization, and Christianity.
The French Revolution’s “Reign of Terror,”
Stalin’s gulags, Hitler’s concentration camps, Pol
Pot’s “Killing Fields,” ISIS’s cages…do you sense a
pattern there? I sure do—and the pattern tells me
that Big (i.e. Left wing) Governments which are
allowed to metastasize to cancerous proportions will
eventually end in tyranny and bloodshed—it’s a
proven truth you can take to the bank.
[Sidebar: I suppose
you can’t blame the left wing for trying to pawn
some of their more disreputable failed ideologies
onto the right wing, but don’t you
fall for the ruse. Keep the communists, fascists,
Nazis, and Muslim totalitarian governments firmly
pinned in your mind where they belong—on the LEFT
side of the political spectrum.
Benito Mussolini, the man who coined the term
“fascism,” once proclaimed “Tutto nello Stato,
niente al di fuori dello Stato, niente contro lo
Stato”—which can be translated as “All within
the government, nothing outside the government,
nothing against the government.” You cannot get
any more LEFT wing than that—yet the Left continues
to bray their absurd “right wing fascists” nonsense
regardless. They can sing to their
choir all they want, but as I say, don’t you
fall for it. “We the people” need to be awake and
alert, now more than ever.]
If you have done your
homework then you know that the Far Left has been
busy, busy, busy for some time trying to destroy
nation-states (i.e. countries) and painting them as
passé, retardataire, and other French
words. For one example read the Agenda 21
proclamation that President Bush Sr. signed “we the
people” up for at the 1992 “Earth Summit” in Rio de
Janeiro (”National
sovereignty is a social injustice”).
National sovereignty is a social injustice? Now
that’s something I’ll bet America’s Founding Framers
did not realize.
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our
responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong, chief organizer of the Agenda 21
“Earth Summit”
Hijra is immigration designed to
subvert and subdue non-Muslim societies and pave the
way for eventual, total Islamization.
Janet Levy “The
Hijra”
If I didn’t know better I
would think that the current Muslim “immigration”
problem in Europe looks a great deal like the
meshing of Islamic hijra with the Far Left’s
desire to destroy nation-states (not to mention the
destruction of Christianity in Europe as well—a sort
of lagniappe as they say in New Orleans).
Actually I do know
better and that’s exactly what it looks like
to me. One world government…good God do you have
any idea what a bloody nightmare that would be?
Any freedom loving American
who suffered through the tin-eared indifference of
the historically corrupt (which is saying something)
111th US Congress as they railroaded
through ObamaCare, got a faint taste of how
arrogant, unresponsive, and uncaring a global
government would be.
In any event, my advice to
globalists of various stripes and persuasions who
have been playing so cute and clever with the Muslim
extremists is STOP IT, or “we the people” will
make you stop, and you will not like how that
goes one bit. In addition, you elites might want to
rethink that whole moral relativism/multiculturalism
boondoggle you’re so fond of, and you students
attending our education/indoctrination centers might
want pull your heads out of your butts for a minute
and consider the full implications of what
destroying the privilege of free speech means.
It all ties together when you connect the dots.
Born June 4, 1951 in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Served in the U.S. Navy
from 1970-1974 in both UDT-21 (Underwater Demolition
Team) and SEAL Team Two. Worked as a
commercial diver in the waters off of Scotland,
India, and the United States. While attending
the University of South Florida as a journalism
student in 1998 was presented with the “Carol
Burnett/University of Hawaii AEJMC Research in
Journalism Ethics Award,” 1st place undergraduate
division. (The annual contest was set up by
Carol Burnett with money she won from successfully
suing a national newspaper for libel). Awarded
US Army, US Navy, South African, and Russian jump
wings. Graduate of NOLS (National Outdoor
Leadership School, 1970). Member of Mensa,
China Post #1, and lifetime member of the UDT/SEAL
Association.
Jim can be reached at:
lausdeo.jim@gmail.com